Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: Stop and ID?

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Thornton, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    136

    Stop and ID?

    I have been doing a bit more reading on Mitchie lately, and was just brushing up on CRS 16-3-103.

    Although the law seems very clear on the surface:

    16-3-103. Stopping of suspect.

    (1) A peace officer may stop any person who he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime and may require him to give his name and address, identification if available, and an explanation of his actions. A peace officer shall not require any person who is stopped pursuant to this section to produce or divulge such person's social security number. The stopping shall not constitute an arrest.

    (2) When a peace officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this section and reasonably suspects that his personal safety requires it, he may conduct a pat-down search of that person for weapons.
    There are a LOT of annotations listed where the Courts have said it's ok to make stops and ask.
    Here's a couple.....

    Limited, temporary detention permissible though no probable cause to arrest exists. A police officer may in appropriate circumstances and in an appropriate manner approach a person for purposes of investigation of possible criminal behavior even though there is no probable cause for arrest. People v. Lucero, 182 Colo. 39, 511 P.2d 468 (1973); People v. Martineau, 185 Colo. 194, 523 P.2d 126 (1974).
    In certain circumstances a police officer having less than probable cause to arrest may stop an individual for identification purposes and not violate the fourth amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure. People v. Mascarenas, 726 P.2d 644 (Colo. 1986).
    Police officers may make a limited stop on less than probable cause. People v. Montoya, 185 Colo. 299, 524 P.2d 76 (1974).
    And for full disclosure, there are also some that state more of the opposite, where it's NOT ok to do this, or the definition is more clearly spelled out.

    An investigatory stop implicates a seizure that is based on less than probable cause and so it must be brief in duration, limited in scope, and narrow in purpose. People v. Tottenhoff, 691 P.2d 340 (Colo. 1984); Outlaw v. People, 17 P.3d 150 (Colo. 2001).
    As I more frequently (especially as the weather warms) find myself OC, I'd be interested in what everyone's thoughts are. I understand that the law is spelled out pretty clear, but......

  2. #2
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    of investigation of possible criminal behavior even though there is no probable cause for arrest.
    ... possible criminal behavior means "I have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that ya doin' wrong"

    Police officers may make a limited stop on less than probable cause. People v. Montoya, 185 Colo. 299, 524 P.2d 76 (1974).
    Again, the step right before having probable cause to arrest is to reasonably suspect that crime is afoot.

    Basically, what the courts seem to be saying, is that IF there is a reasonable, articulable suspicion of a crime, an officer is authorized by law to conduct an investigation to determine if that suspicion is correct. If such suspicions are confirmed then there is probable cause that a crime has occurred and an arrest is warranted.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    2
    I feel that if we are given a permit to carry a handgun openly then perhaps we should have some sort of identifying mark via a badge or pin so when an officer sees it they know we're one of the good guys and not have to stop us.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Calhan, Co.
    Posts
    340
    I would like to add that in Colorado a properly holstered firearm in plain view is not a reasonable cause for alarm/suspicion. Now, if you mix in an odd demeanor or running from the sound of car alarms, I would say that it would give them a reason to stop you and conduct a further investigation. Reasonable articulable suspicion is just that, a suspicion that there has or will be a crime committed and that the person being stopped is in some way involved. However, it has been proven through the court system, here and elsewhere, that a lot of discretion must be used when police use this to stop someone.

  5. #5
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by darylendicott View Post
    I feel that if we are given a permit to carry a handgun openly then perhaps we should have some sort of identifying mark via a badge or pin so when an officer sees it they know we're one of the good guys and not have to stop us.
    Unworkable. How long do you think it would take for such a "badge or pin" to become generally available (maybe even on eBay) to anyone who wanted to delay suspicion that the person might not have a "permit?" Think a LEO would be convinced by a "badge or pin" that everything is "ok" and no further investigation is needed?

  6. #6
    Regular Member JamesB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lakewood, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by darylendicott View Post
    I feel that if we are given a permit to carry a handgun openly then perhaps we should have some sort of identifying mark via a badge or pin so when an officer sees it they know we're one of the good guys and not have to stop us.
    We are! It's called a holster.

    I have yet to see any gang menber from any gang ever use one.
    (now if only we could get the boys in blue to recognize this fact.)

  7. #7
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesB View Post
    We are! It's called a holster.

    I have yet to see any gang menber from any gang ever use one.
    (now if only we could get the boys in blue to recognize this fact.)
    Don't make any mistake, the 'boys in blue' are WELL aware of this fact. They hassle people who OC because of other issues, and not because they think they are felons or are about to commit a crime.

  8. #8
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    BTW, welcome to the forum.
    Quote Originally Posted by darylendicott
    perhaps we should have some sort of identifying mark via a badge or pin so when an officer sees it they know we're one of the good guys and not have to stop us.
    They don't have to stop us anyway. They choose to.
    And as others have pointed out, criminals don't OC & don't use holsters.

    Here are PDFs of an FBI study published in AUG06 called "Violent Encounters: A Study of Felonious Assaults on Our Nation's Law Enforcement Officers", in which they conclude (among other things) that criminals don't OC & practically never use holsters.
    http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2...ncounters.html
    IIRC, those assertions come in chapter 4, but don't hold me to that. It's been a while since I read it.
    Last edited by MKEgal; 05-21-2011 at 10:22 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Good link, MKEgal - thanks!
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by darylendicott View Post
    I feel that if we are given a permit to carry a handgun openly then perhaps we should have some sort of identifying mark via a badge or pin so when an officer sees it they know we're one of the good guys and not have to stop us.
    How about a tattoo on the forehead?

  11. #11
    Regular Member RandallFlagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    BTW, welcome to the forum.

    They don't have to stop us anyway. They choose to.
    And as others have pointed out, criminals don't OC & don't use holsters.

    Here are PDFs of an FBI study published in AUG06 called "Violent Encounters: A Study of Felonious Assaults on Our Nation's Law Enforcement Officers", in which they conclude (among other things) that criminals don't OC & practically never use holsters.
    http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2...ncounters.html
    IIRC, those assertions come in chapter 4, but don't hold me to that. It's been a while since I read it.
    Just yesterday I had to explain this to the guys at work. It was pretty easy, really:
    "How many criminals have their guns in open holsters before walking into the 7-11 or the bank to rob it?"

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by RandallFlagg View Post
    Just yesterday I had to explain this to the guys at work. It was pretty easy, really:
    "How many criminals have their guns in open holsters before walking into the 7-11 or the bank to rob it?"
    Do you work at 7-11?

    It's one of the on-going discussions I have with local folks with respect to who's really a threat to them and who's not. They know me personally, so they know I'm not a threat, per, se, yet I can still sense there on edge.

    Dang. I've been getting gas from them for nearly two years and they're still "on edge."

    What am I'm doing wrong? They've been robbed once by armed criminals throughout this period, while I've been getting from them nearly exclusively?

    Are criminals just THAT good?

    Do WE need to ramp it up?

    If so, I've responses for 37 suggestions for both OCer, CCers, as well as each and every business organization in and around Colorado.

    If so, we'll ramp it up. Whatever it takes.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  13. #13
    Regular Member RandallFlagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Do you work at 7-11?

    It's one of the on-going discussions I have with local folks with respect to who's really a threat to them and who's not. They know me personally, so they know I'm not a threat, per, se, yet I can still sense there on edge.

    Dang. I've been getting gas from them for nearly two years and they're still "on edge."

    What am I'm doing wrong? They've been robbed once by armed criminals throughout this period, while I've been getting from them nearly exclusively?

    Are criminals just THAT good?

    Do WE need to ramp it up?

    If so, I've responses for 37 suggestions for both OCer, CCers, as well as each and every business organization in and around Colorado.

    If so, we'll ramp it up. Whatever it takes.
    Naaa. I work at Coors.
    It seems that I've been the, "Go to," guy there when it comes to weapons, laws and politics.
    Why do I have a bar in my home? Because it's cheaper to stock a bar than to get a DUI.

  14. #14
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    912
    Quote Originally Posted by RandallFlagg View Post
    Naaa. I work at Coors.
    It seems that I've been the, "Go to," guy there when it comes to weapons, laws and politics.
    At least where you work they make more than just one decent beer. Bud's only decent beer is Michelob.
    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187
    Quote Originally Posted by ZackL View Post
    I would like to add that in Colorado a properly holstered firearm in plain view is not a reasonable cause for alarm/suspicion. Now, if you mix in an odd demeanor or running from the sound of car alarms, I would say that it would give them a reason to stop you and conduct a further investigation. Reasonable articulable suspicion is just that, a suspicion that there has or will be a crime committed and that the person being stopped is in some way involved.
    Say....by walking a neighborhood with accomplices, one of whom has an outstanding warrant, knocking on doors seeing who is not home and gathering other information about neighbors from those are?

  16. #16
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by OldCurlyWolf View Post
    At least where you work they make more than just one decent beer. Bud's only decent beer is Michelob.
    With massive amounts of outstanding beer in Colorado, why anyone would drink anything from the macro brewers is beyond me.

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingfish View Post
    With massive amounts of outstanding beer in Colorado, why anyone would drink anything from the macro brewers is beyond me.
    Sure, like my favorite beer pretty much anywhere, but it's made here in Colorado: Blue Moon.

    Of course it's made by Coors, not exactly a microbrewery...
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  18. #18
    Regular Member RandallFlagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Sure, like my favorite beer pretty much anywhere, but it's made here in Colorado: Blue Moon.

    Of course it's made by Coors, not exactly a microbrewery...
    I'm kinda partial to Grand Cru, myself. Too bad it's only made in the Winter months.
    Why do I have a bar in my home? Because it's cheaper to stock a bar than to get a DUI.

  19. #19
    Regular Member JamesB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lakewood, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Sure, like my favorite beer pretty much anywhere, but it's made here in Colorado: Blue Moon.

    Of course it's made by Coors, not exactly a microbrewery...
    I would say come on up for the brewery tour and enjoy some for free where it's guaranteed to be the freshest.

    I would say that except that Coors is private property and they say no guns allowed. No free beer for me.

  20. #20
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by darylendicott View Post
    I feel that if we are given a permit to carry a handgun openly then perhaps we should have some sort of identifying mark via a badge or pin so when an officer sees it they know we're one of the good guys and not have to stop us.

    It has been done before... IN Germany, they only had the Jews wear gold stars. It only ended with a few MILLION exterminated!

    Are you sure you want to go there with this?

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesB View Post
    I would say come on up for the brewery tour and enjoy some for free where it's guaranteed to be the freshest.

    I would say that except that Coors is private property and they say no guns allowed. No free beer for me.
    Lol, I have no problem leaving my firearm in the car (or at home) to visit a place like the Coors Brewery. Perhaps some of the others? A post-Brewery OC meet might be fun.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  22. #22
    Regular Member M-Taliesin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aurora, Colorado
    Posts
    1,504
    Quote Originally Posted by darylendicott View Post
    I feel that if we are given a permit <snip> perhaps we should have some sort of identifying mark via a badge or pin so when an officer sees it they know we're one of the good guys and not have to stop us.
    Howdy Amigo!
    Frankly that has about the same appeal as the officer deciding to give me an enema while checking me out during a stop. Either way the pain is similar, and the locus is identical.

    Blessings,
    M-Taliesin
    Last edited by M-Taliesin; 06-08-2011 at 08:54 AM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    It has been done before... IN Germany, they only had the Jews wear gold stars. It only ended with a few MILLION exterminated!

    Are you sure you want to go there with this?
    That was the opposite actually. It was in the Soviet Union where the "good guys" were "party members" and wore special pins. They did that in Germany, too, but LEO's leaving the good guys alone was more prevalent in the USSR. Everyone was treated equally suspect in Germany. How egalitarian, eh?

  24. #24
    Regular Member O2HeN2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    232
    Glad to find an existing note!

    To continue the discussion:

    CRS 16-3-103 (1) states:

    16-3-103. Stopping of suspect.

    (1) A peace officer may stop any person who he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime and may require him to give his name and address, identification if available, and an explanation of his actions. A peace officer shall not require any person who is stopped pursuant to this section to produce or divulge such person's social security number. The stopping shall not constitute an arrest.

    Is there any case law around this for OC? Does mere open carry itself allow an LEO to "reasonably suspect" that you are about to commit a crime? And if merely "having the equipment" makes an LEO "reasonably suspect" you're about to commit a crime, does that mean any LEO can stop any male because he suspects that they're about to commit rape, and any female because they're about to hook? (flippant, but valid)

    The key to the answer here is going to be case law around OC and Stop & ID, is there any?

    People v. DF is a mixed bag and doesn't really help...

    O2

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by O2HeN2 View Post
    Is there any case law around this for OC?
    Yes. In the link you provided, search on the term "weapons." Case law galore.

    Does mere open carry itself allow an LEO to "reasonably suspect" that you are about to commit a crime?
    No.

    And if merely "having the equipment" makes an LEO "reasonably suspect" you're about to commit a crime, does that mean any LEO can stop any male because he suspects that they're about to commit rape, and any female because they're about to hook? (flippant, but valid)
    If it's not allowable for the metal gun...
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

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
  •