LEO Interaction at State Department Fed Credit Union in Arlington

boyscout399 · Feb 13, 2011

MKEgal said:
Yeah, what they said.
1) You don't have to show your DL unless you're driving.
2) If he could see your pistol, you didn't need a permit. If it was concealed, he didn't see it, so wouldn't have known to stop you & pester you.
3) What RAS did he have of a crime in order to stop you in the first place?
4) Was he really on duty, or was the bank paying him? If the latter, he had no right to demand anything of you. If the former, why is the city (taxpayers) paying to secure a business?

If you're carrying concealed and your coat rides up to expose the pistol and the officer sees this, then the officer observed you carrying concealed. The pistol cannot magically appear on your belt when the coat rides up, it was concealed under the coat before it rode up. The RAS is that he observed a concealed pistol and concealing a pistol without a license is a crime, and considering a relatively small percentage of the population has a CCW permit, so until he sees your license, a reasonable officer in that situation would develop suspicion that the crime of carrying a concealed weapon was being committed.

Remember, to detain, they do not need Probable Cause, only Reasonable Suspicion. It is a considerably lower threshold.

ed · Feb 13, 2011

boyscout399 said:
The RAS is that he observed a concealed pistol and concealing a pistol without a license is a crime.

Thats a big reach. I can open or conceal at my free will. (Taking off and putting on my coat, or letting my shirt ride up.. intentionally or not..) It still does not give probable cause.

USNA69 · Feb 13, 2011

ed said:
I am willing to bet dollars to donuts that it was not ON and Recording during the interaction..

Which is why I stick to my guns on the recorder issue and say it must be ON and RECORDING to capture the incidents like this when you carry. If nothing was said the entire day of interest.. you delete and start over the next day.

What if you have a life or death confrontation and you have to defend yourself. Don't you want an audio record of the encounter? what was said? when you shot? the timeline? I sure do!

+1

Your DVR must become a routine action ... a ritual. Mine is on my bureau. When I prepare to leave home and carry, I first place the DVR on a lanyard around my neck, start to record, and place it in my shirt pocket. Only them do I don my holster and sidearm. Same thing ... EVERY TIME. I never have to make the conscious decision.

In a life threatening situation, you WILL NOT remember to start a recorder. Just run it all the time; batteries are cheap.

When I return home and disarm, I erase the recording, if nothing happened.

That DVR is your only truth insurance; don't leave home without it.

Mine is an Olympus VN-6200PC.

Jon34511 · Feb 13, 2011

Just to chime in on the cop being "on duty" or not, I can only speak for my local department because I know the policy but I would imagine it is similar in Arlington. When a police officer works part time, inside of the same city they patrol, they are getting paid by the business they are working security for. They still have all of their normal police powers. As soon as they switch to doing a police action (such as making an arrest) the pay from the business stops and they are compensated by the city.

xd shooter · Feb 13, 2011

The RAS is that he observed a concealed pistol and concealing a pistol without a license is a crime

Driving a car without a license is illegal as well, yet I suspect that you don't want them pulling over EVERYONE because they MIGHT be driving w/o a license do you?

You see them driving, you know it's illegal to drive w/o a license, that's enough RAS to pull someone over? Doubt it.

The only difference here is that the subject of discussion is a GUN vs a car. You're falling into the anti-gun trap, seeing the gun as the evil thing instead of the person behind it.

skidmark · Feb 13, 2011

Jon34511 said:
Just to chime in on the cop being "on duty" or not, I can only speak for my local department because I know the policy but I would imagine it is similar in Arlington. When a police officer works part time, inside of the same city they patrol, they are getting paid by the business they are working security for. They still have all of their normal police powers. As soon as they switch to doing a police action (such as making an arrest) the pay from the business stops and they are compensated by the city.

Is there any way you can provide a citation or information on how we can access that policy?

I'm really curious how your locality handles the situation, because there are so many issues regarding things such as time scheduling, overtime pay, workers' compensation, tort liability for both the city and the private business, DCJS policy re: duties and ethical behavior of private security guards, and so on for probably another page or so just to list.

stay safe.

Jon34511 · Feb 13, 2011

skidmark said:
Is there any way you can provide a citation or information on how we can access that policy?

I'm really curious how your locality handles the situation, because there are so many issues regarding things such as time scheduling, overtime pay, workers' compensation, tort liability for both the city and the private business, DCJS policy re: duties and ethical behavior of private security guards, and so on for probably another page or so just to list.

stay safe.

It used to be posted online, but I think it has since been taken down. If I manage to find it again I'll post it. From my understanding, if they do any police work while "part time" it is considered overtime and therefore any liability would fall under the department. If they are just hanging out at a business they are paid by the company's dime, as security in uniform, and they can only work inside of the city they serve.

Citizen · Feb 13, 2011

ed said:
Thats a big reach. I can open or conceal at my free will. (Taking off and putting on my coat, or letting my shirt ride up.. intentionally or not..) It still does not give probable cause.

I don't know about this; do you have a case cite?

I'm thinking that 18.2-308A makes a concealed handgun, among other specified weapons, illegal. Then, in subsequent paragraphs, exceptions are made for your own home, your business, etc., and CHP holders.

I'm betting judges will say a momentarily visible holster or gun is RAS for a detention until the cop sees a CHP.

We do have some case law about detaining a person just for a bulge. Lemme see if I can find it.

ETA: I found what I was looking for. I misremembered the crux of the case. It does not apply.

jmb_nova · Feb 14, 2011

ED - Any recommendations for recorders?

Thanks!

ed · Feb 14, 2011

jmb_nova said:
ED - Any recommendations for recorders?

http://www.google.com/products/cata...log_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CEwQ8wIwAw

mklBvD6O7IzoeIZzgqSZckfFNcxQRAPUReFCsv6qtIwJk61W7WWrpJuLKZY_t7LAiqXt_IUUjglshQusSV_9qzrbhRlq3yEZ_eOqDCWcdrDjEd-RpH8wDHu_2JLqeVbcdZgqm0RXl01U54hzmRNxVXqX

ed · Feb 14, 2011

Citizen said:
I don't know about this; do you have a case cite?

I'm thinking that 18.2-308A makes a concealed handgun, among other specified weapons, illegal. Then, in subsequent paragraphs, exceptions are made for your own home, your business, etc., and CHP holders.

I'm betting judges will say a momentarily visible holster or gun is RAS for a detention until the cop sees a CHP.

I am a CHP holder.. I don't have a cite.. If a car speedometer goes up to 120MPH does the cop have RAS to stop me because I may attempt to go that fast?

ETA: if they see the clip on my pocket knife.. is that RAS to "think" that the blade might be longer than allowed?

jmb_nova · Feb 14, 2011

ed said:
http://www.google.com/products/cata...log_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CEwQ8wIwAw

Thanks!

peter nap · Feb 14, 2011

jmb_nova said:
Thanks!

A little larger than what many want but I use my Zoom H1 as often as my smaller recorders. Much better audio.

ODA 226 · Feb 14, 2011

ed said:
Thats a big reach. I can open or conceal at my free will. (Taking off and putting on my coat, or letting my shirt ride up.. intentionally or not..) It still does not give probable cause.

That's not a big reach Ed. If I were still a LEO and saw a momentary flash of a weapon or if a weapon was partially exposed or printing, I'd have legal RAS to detain you in order to determine your legal status.

Granted you can open or conceal at will, but if you conceal, it would behooves ya to have a valid CHP.

BTW: Did you get that check yet?

Michael Hopkins · Feb 14, 2011

ed said:
a LEO I know was told by his SGT. was illegal because .. "banks are insured by FDIC with makes them FEDERAL property." :banghead:

Yes, it's me again. Yes, I lurk the VA forums trying to stay up on the adventures of Skidmark.

As a point of logic, when I see the above quoted text, which banks around here have been tossing around, the following comparison comes to mind...

"If a bank being insured by FDIC makes it Federal property, does my car being insured by GEICO (Gov't Employees Insurance Co.) make it a Federal vehicle?"

If so, I want my Gov't plates, doggone it!! :shocker:

Citizen · Feb 14, 2011

Michael Hopkins said:
SNIP If so, I want my Gov't plates, doggone it!! :shocker:

Take the plates, but demand the property tax exemption!

Grapeshot · Feb 14, 2011

Michael Hopkins said:
I want my Gov't plates, doggone it!! :shocker:

Oh but you do - we both do. Only difference is that yours were issued by the Utah government and mine by the Virgina government. :lol:

Skid even gets unlimited, free on street parking with his.

Michael Hopkins · Feb 14, 2011

Grapeshot said:
Oh but you do - we both do. Only difference is that yours were issued by the Utah government and mine by the Virgina government. :lol:

Skid even gets unlimited, free on street parking with his.

Ok, you got me. I meant those snazzy white plates with the US Gov't type off to the side of a number. Get out of a car wearing a black suit, tie, and some ray-bans with those plates; it's a sure way to keep a low profile.

KBCraig · Feb 14, 2011

ODA 226 said:
That's not a big reach Ed. If I were still a LEO and saw a momentary flash of a weapon or if a weapon was partially exposed or printing, I'd have legal RAS to detain you in order to determine your legal status.

No more than you have RAS to stop a driver to demand their driver's license.

Grapeshot · Feb 15, 2011

ODA 226 said:
That's not a big reach Ed. If I were still a LEO and saw a momentary flash of a weapon or if a weapon was partially exposed or printing, I'd have legal RAS to detain you in order to determine your legal status.

Granted you can open or conceal at will, but if you conceal, it would behooves ya to have a valid CHP.

BTW: Did you get that check yet?

KBCraig said:
No more than you have RAS to stop a driver to demand their driver's license.

I agree to a point

The mere sight of a handgun is not a reason for a Terry stop; however, the Code of Virginia does state that:

" The person issued the permit shall have such permit on his person at all times during which he is carrying a concealed handgun and shall display the permit and a photo-identification issued by a government agency of the Commonwealth or by the United States Department of Defense or United States State Department (passport) upon demand by a law-enforcement officer."

http://leg1.state.va.us/000/cod/18.2-308.HTMhttp://leg1.state.va.us/000/cod/18.2-308.HTM

LEO Interaction at State Department Fed Credit Union in Arlington

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member - Moderator

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member - Moderator

Founder's Club Member - Moderator

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior