Fairfax County Police Video - How they respond to "person with a gun" calls

Citizen · Mar 6, 2011

ed said:
And I specifically asked.. what if I keep on walking or walk away. I was told that would be the end of the encounter and both Captains agreed.

Yeah, right. I tooooootally believe them. We all saw how short cop completely ignored Philip's express refused consent to a consensual encounter. If I recall, Philip even made to start walking again, and the cop interjected, "It will only take a minute."

Philip again expressly refused consent to a consensual encounter. Short cop then offered him a ride. Which caused great laughter and lite moment; but totally obscured the fact that the cop, right in front of our eyes, ignored Philips express refusals to a consensual encounter.

As I recall, the case law does not require one to keep walking as the only manifestation of refused consent accepted by the courts.

This is simply cop-games to play loose and fast and exploit a supposed loophole in 4A law, rather than actually respect people's rights.

I got five dollars that says the Capt's were just giving a theoretical answer to a hypothetical question.

peter nap · Mar 6, 2011

Citizen said:
Yeah, right. I tooooootally believe them. We all saw how short cop completely ignored Philip's express refused consent to a consensual encounter. If I recall, Philip even made to start walking again, and the cop interjected, "It will only take a minute."

Philip again expressly refused consent to a consensual encounter. Short cop then offered him a ride. Which caused great laughter and lite moment; but totally obscured the fact that the cop, right in front of our eyes, ignored Philips express refusals to a consensual encounter.

As I recall, the case law does not require one to keep walking as the only manifestation of refused consent accepted by the courts.

This is simply cop-games to play loose and fast and exploit a loophole in 4A case law, rather than actually respect people's rights.

I got five dollars that says the Capt's were just giving a theoretical answer to a hypothetical question.

I have developed a routine that works very well Citizen. I only recommend it if you have your "Be Polite" video camera on because it is guaranteed to PO the best tempered Cop, but it works.

Get the initial "Am I being Detained" question over with.

Cop...It will only take a minute.
Me....This conversation is over
Cop...Is there a reason you don't want to talk to me?
Me....I'm tired of repeating myself. I'll use a code from now on. Number one means this conversation is over.
Cop...Why are you being argumentative?
Me....Number one
Cop...Can you just tell me_
Me...Number one.

You get the idea.
Never let them control the conversation or intimidate you.

Grapeshot · Mar 6, 2011

peter nap said:
I have developed a routine that works very well Citizen. I only recommend it if you have your "Be Polite" video camera on because it is guaranteed to PO the best tempered Cop, but it works.

Get the initial "Am I being Detained" question over with.

Cop...It will only take a minute.
Me....This conversation is over
Cop...Is there a reason you don't want to talk to me?
Me....I'm tired of repeating myself. I'll use a code from now on. Number one means this conversation is over.
Cop...Why are you being argumentative?
Me....Number one
Cop...Can you just tell me_
Me...Number one.

You get the idea.
Never let them control the conversation or intimidate you.

There are sooo many ways I could respond to this, commencing with a child's code for #1 and #2, but I won't .. not here .. oh snit I just did. < hand slap >

Is there a 10 code for an uncooperative citizen who knows his rights?

SIGguy229 · Mar 6, 2011

In their scenario....they were talking to the "suspects" in "cop talk"......that is...

Suspect: "Officer...I'd like to let you know, I have a CHL and have a firearm" [or something to that effect]
Cop: "Alright....just don't make any furtive movements towards it"

<break>

My response would be: "WTF is a furtive movement?....talk to me like a person and not another cop" My point being--not everyone knows what a furtive movement is....

Blk97F150 · Mar 6, 2011

SIGguy229 said:
My response would be: "WTF is a furtive movement?....talk to me like a person and not another cop" My point being--not everyone knows what a furtive movement is....

Furtive = Any real or perceived movement that they will later use to justify either: 1. Shooting your ass, 2. Tasering you, or 3. giving you a 'wood shampoo'. These movements could include coughing, sneezing, reaching for your wallet.... etc...

All in the name of 'officer safety' of course.... :shocker:

curtiswr · Mar 6, 2011

Badger Johnson said:
They talk a lot about mutual respect and not treating legal residents like second class citizens, but you will never find a cop who stops a guy OC-ing walking his dog:

"Sir, I'm not detaining you, there is no RAS, but I'd like to ask you a question and you don't have to answer it and you are free to go", then ask name or where the person is going (duh, walking dog).

In that case I -might- be inclined to tell him, since he's not lying to me or trying to trip me up or make me -think- I'm being detained.

Don't make the OC-er think he's being detained. Don't ask for ID if you have no RAS and it's non-traffic stop. Don't ask an OC for their permit. Period.

WE ARE NOT the bad guys.

Edit to add: The reason they lie and ask things they can't is because they want to fish. They figure that 10 innocent civilians being lied to is OK if they can arrest one bad guy. BUT that's the opposite of 'innocent until proven guilty' and 'it's better for 10 BGs to go free than to imprison one innocent person'. Neither of these important elements to a free society means anything to LE. They are trained to lie and 'fish' and then look you in the eye and say they're not lying or fishing. That's my beef. It comes from the TOP.

+1

There's a lot about implicit character judgments being made when you come out essentially forcefully. It pretty much puts anyone on the defensive, no matter what the situation. Cop, receipt checker

p), whatever the situation, tone and approach go a long way. I thought that's something everyone was taught when they were young.

It'd be interesting to see VCDL meetings with police officers from all over Virginia, like this. Not sure how possible that would be. It's a lot of time and a lot of travel. There would also have to be cooperation and mutual respect and I'm not sure some of the departments are capable of that. Let's go ask Richmond Police Chief Norwood. :uhoh:

Grapeshot · Mar 6, 2011

Curtis said:
There would also have to be cooperation and mutual respect and I'm not sure some of the departments are capable of that. Let's go ask Richmond Police Chief Norwood. :uhoh:

I would show him courtesy, but think that our respect for each other is already mutual.

curtiswr · Mar 6, 2011

Grapeshot said:
I would show him courtesy, but think that our respect for each other is already mutual.

Repeater · Mar 6, 2011

Endless Loop

peter nap said:
I have developed a routine that works very well Citizen. I only recommend it if you have your "Be Polite" video camera on because it is guaranteed to PO the best tempered Cop, but it works.

Get the initial "Am I being Detained" question over with.

Never let them control the conversation or intimidate you.

Agreed. Here's an Endless Loop Routine:

Do

You: "Am I free to leave?"
Cop: "No."
You: "Am I under arrest?"
Cop: "No."

Loop

Repeat until the Cop tires of the endless 'Repeater' routine and finally answers "Yes"

Repeater · Mar 6, 2011

What if you're sitting?

ed said:
And I specifically asked.. what if I keep on walking or walk away. I was told that would be the end of the encounter and both Captains agreed.

The problem I've always had with that (you walking away) is if you are sitting, minding your own business, and having a snack or reading a book or doing something else -- and it is the cop that needs to walk away.

How do you (politely) ask the cop to walk away and leave you alone without having the incident escalate into something worse?

architect · Mar 6, 2011

Whatever was learned or otherwise taken away from the presentation/Q&A by the FCPD I think there is something that is is now known that to my understanding had not been publicly admitted before. I.e. that aggressive tactics of pushing "over the line" for information, intentionally keeping presumed-to-be-law-abiding citizens off balance during "consensual encounters," and even allowing the expression of outright lies to further their cause are not the refuge of "rogue officers" nor inexperienced ones, but are in fact officially-sanctioned and uniformly taught to all sworn officers by policy.

ed · Mar 6, 2011

architect said:
Whatever was learned or otherwise taken away from the presentation/Q&A by the FCPD I think there is something that is is now known that to my understanding had not been publicly admitted before. I.e. that aggressive tactics of pushing "over the line" for information, intentionally keeping presumed-to-be-law-abiding citizens off balance during "consensual encounters," and even allowing the expression of outright lies to further their cause are not the refuge of "rogue officers" nor inexperienced ones, but are in fact officially-sanctioned and uniformly taught to all sworn officers by policy.

I disagree

architect · Mar 6, 2011

ed said:
I disagree

Do you mean that you don't think they use these tactics, it isn't policy, that they haven't acknowledged such, or that it was not previously disclaimed?

ed · Mar 6, 2011

architect said:
Do you mean that you don't think they use these tactics, it isn't policy, that they haven't acknowledged such, or that it was not previously disclaimed?

A bit of all of it. I think they have a job to do and they do it best they can.. we curb them to even do it better. I don't think it is POLICY to harass or "trap" citizens. I have had many dinners, nods, conversations, non-conversations and looks from police of all jurisdictions. Some I have corrected and some I have not, But for the most part, I think they provide a good service to the community without stepping on MY 2nd amendment rights.

peter nap · Mar 6, 2011

ed said:
I disagree

Ed, you were there. Did you see something that wasn't in the video?

What I saw as a group of Novacop replicas, BS'ing the crowd teling them what a jungle it is out there and that they only want to go home to their families...and

The crowd falling for it, talking up their permits and asking "How Mr. Policeman, can I make your job easier".

Now, what did I miss?

ed · Mar 6, 2011

peter nap said:
Ed, you were there. Did you see something that wasn't in the video?

What I saw as a group of Novacop replicas, BS'ing the crowd teling them what a jungle it is out there and that they only want to go home to their families...and

The crowd falling for it, talking up their permits and asking "How Mr. Policeman, can I make your job easier".

Now, what did I miss?

You missed about an HOUR of individual conversations in the hallway with the each of the police and Captains. With VCDL members posing their own scenarios and answers as well. I think the police learned as well.

Don't get me wrong.. there is ALWAYS room for improvement.. abd I am not tryign to convince anyone right or wrong on how I feel.. I am just stating my opinion. Just remember.. I am from NORTHERN Virginia and our opinions may be different.

Tess · Mar 6, 2011

ed said:
A bit of all of it. I think they have a job to do and they do it best they can.. we curb them to even do it better. I don't think it is POLICY to harass or "trap" citizens. I have had many dinners, nods, conversations, non-conversations and looks from police of all jurisdictions. Some I have corrected and some I have not, But for the most part, I think they provide a good service to the community without stepping on MY 2nd amendment rights.

Moot point, IMO. The nods, conversations, non-conversations, etc. generally haven't resulted from the MWAG call, which was the point of the meeting's session, however.

The officers admitted once they've received that call, they will address the law-abiding citizen, even if they've noted the person appears to be no threat. That was my biggest beef -- beyond their assumption they have to know everything and it's my duty to tell them.

curtiswr · Mar 6, 2011

Tess said:
The officers admitted once they've received that call, they will address the law-abiding citizen, even if they've noted the person appears to be no threat. That was my biggest beef -- beyond their assumption they have to know everything and it's my duty to tell them.

Even the smallest of chihuahuas will try to assert and display alpha status when they can.

ed · Mar 6, 2011

Tess said:
The officers admitted once they've received that call, they will address the law-abiding citizen, even if they've noted the person appears to be no threat. That was my biggest beef -- beyond their assumption they have to know everything and it's my duty to tell them.

True. In the same breath they ALSO said they will address a guy drinkin a soda or wearin a red shirt IF A CALL CAME IN for them. If I gave legal advice (and I don't) I would tell my client to not talk to the police and continue about their business. End of encounter.

marshaul · Mar 6, 2011

Grapeshot said:
I would show him courtesy, but think that our respect for each other is already mutual.

Oh hoh!

Fairfax County Police Video - How they respond to "person with a gun" calls

Founder's Club Member

Accomplished Advocate

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member - Moderator

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member - Moderator

Accomplished Advocate

Founder's Club Member - Moderator

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member - Moderator

Campaign Veteran