Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 111

Thread: Be prepared to deal with LE at some time or another (even at Belmar)

  1. #1
    Regular Member Lokster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Unincorporated Jefferson County
    Posts
    126

    Be prepared to deal with LE at some time or another (even at Belmar)

    I'm not going to say that I handled the situation perfectly because in some ways it did catch me somewhat off guard, not unprepared however; and I would add that anytime all parties involved leave peacefully after a firearm has been un-holstered and drawn is a good outcome although it probably could have been handled better by all parties.

    Alright, now that my disclaimer is out of the way I'll go into the details as this event occurred around an hour or so ago at Belmar in Lakewood. Before I start however I will say that I have been open carrying on the public grounds at Belmar for months now. It is a fun place to walk the dog as he gets plenty of attention from people who are shopping and out and about like myself. During a handful of previous visits I have encountered the private security for Belmar and Lakewood police officers who were driving by and noticing either me or my dog, or both and but have never stopped to make contact.

    After walking the dog around for awhile we decided to stop near Target, but in the public area where the water fountain is setup. Loki, my dog, was thirsty and he was wetting his whistle at the fountain while all of the sudden I heard from behind me to keep my hand away from my hip. I instantly turned around and there was a Lakewood police officer no more than twenty five feet behind me with his gun drawn and at low ready. After he told me to sit down that is when the questions started, "Do you have a CCW?", I was then ordered to grab my wallet and ID because, " I would have to be identified."

    I declined and mentioned that there was no reason for me to provide identification. At that point another officer came up behind me and told me to put my hands on top of my head, while grabbing my hands and placing them there himself. He then told me that he was just going to grab it for me and he started to poke around in my pockets. I mentioned to him that he was grabbing my wallet without my consent. He let up for minute while the other officer told me that I was not allowed to open carry a firearm in the Belmar area. I told him twice that it's not posted anywhere. A third officer then told me to relax though I don't believe I was tense. After I told her that there was no reason I was being detained I was told by her that they were making sure that I wasn't a felon.

    I then asked her if I was then free to go and I was asked if I was willing to give up my name. I told her that there is no reason that I should provide a name for doing nothing wrong. Officer number two mentioned that it made sense to me to give them my name because I was carrying a firearm and my not be allowed to. He then told me that he needed to verify that I was allowed to be carrying. I asked him to provide me with a statute and he came back with "it's prohibited use of a firearm by a felon." and because he hasn't identified me he doesn't know that I'm not a felon. Once again he said, "I need to identify you." I said that I will not be providing ID since I've asked twice what I've done wrong and have received no answer. After asking to move to a spot away from the water so my dog would quit drinking water and moving I asked if I could remove my hands from my head. The officer said, "Not yet."

    Then the female officer after being silent from being on the phone for several minutes asked me if I lived around there. I said I won't be answering that either because I've done nothing wrong. One of the other male officers told me that it was posted all over the garage that no firearms are allowed. I said that we are not in the garage. Then it changed to, "You cannot walk around the Belmar area with an open firearm." I then asked that they would call a supervisor immediately and was told that one was in route. I was told to relax again even though I had places that I needed to be and was being held up. Then I was asked to give a fake name so that they could converse with me. I got a little sarcastic, but basically said that that wasn't a good idea. I was then told that I would be removed from private areas and I said then I will leave willingly. He said that if I live in the area I wouldn't be able to come back. The female officer finally got off the phone and told me to go ahead and head out while reminding me of the signs posted in the garage and that everything was fine since I didn't have my firearm concealed and I was in a public area. She also reminded me that in the future I would probably have a "hard time because I was open carrying".

    I mentioned that there was no reason why I was responded to in such a manner as I was. I reminded her that I committed no crime and was being detained. She mentioned that it was, "a kind of grey area." I was asked to listen for a minute while she explained to me "the dangers of our world". After another minute or two of dialogue she finished and told me that if I have places to go I need to "head out" again.

    Another officer then chimed in explaining how if I would have given him my name when he walked up and mentioned how I hold a CCW (even though I wasn't CC) he wouldn't have become suspicious and that because he didn't know who I was he needed dispatch to pull some information. I told him that I would never give my name just because. The female officer then told me to "head out" oh and "have a good night." I then asked her if where we were located right now was public property and she responded that it was. The she ended the whole ordeal with "that is why I am telling you that we are done and you are no longer being detained." Then I got up and walked away.

    I'm sure I provided quite the show for the few dozen people watching at a cafe in the distance. There were at least four LEO who were at the scene as well as another 3 or so Belmar security personnel. As I say, I had a feeling I'd have a LE encounter at some point or another, but never thought it would happen like that and at Belmar of all places.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Wow. Sounds like you handled everything great. And it appears the officers made the right choice in the end. As a precaution, I would FOIA all of the communications and documentation related to your detainment. Glad you came out ok! Were you recording or is that not allowed in CO?
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  3. #3
    Regular Member Lokster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Unincorporated Jefferson County
    Posts
    126
    Thanks for the response, thebigsd. I will have to do some research to discover what the process is to obtain information under FOIA. This is something I'm not familiar with presently. I always carry my recorder while OC and luckily, despite it being in my front jean pocket, was able to pick everything up just fine. I am surely glad everything came out ok too, however I can't help but think of some completely possible what if scenarios. Also, when I think about the statement of one officer informing me that I should expect such harassment in the future because "our world is dangerous" is a completely unacceptable response to me.

  4. #4
    Regular Member M-Taliesin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aurora, Colorado
    Posts
    1,504
    Howdy Lockster!
    Wow, what an experience you had. Sorry it hadda happen to a decent guy such as yourself. I find it difficult to believe that an officer would simply call you out with his weapon drawn and trained on you!

    This sounds like an improper stop. You were detained while not engaged in criminal activity. You were threatened with deadly force. This sounds like one heckuva law suit to me amigo!

    I'd recommend that you contact an attorney and investigage whether your rights were infringed, and by your story, it surely sounds like you were.

    Did they give you any RAS for your being detained? They searched you without warrant or RAS. That's another strike.

    Glad it turned out well and nobody got hurt (like you, f'rinstance!) and were eventually allowed to go in peace. But then again, you were at peace until threatened at gunpoint.
    I'd be talking with an attorney come Tuesday morning, if it had happened to me. And I'd want me a real good one willing to go after them for violating your civil rights. This is even more egregious than the Longmont incident, if my understanding of your story is correct, and the city had to cough up 15 large for their shenannigans there!

    Peace, friend, and stay safe out there.

    Blessings,
    M-Taliesin

  5. #5
    Regular Member Lokster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Unincorporated Jefferson County
    Posts
    126
    Howdy M-Taliesin, thanks for your kind words. I'm still finding it difficult to believe how the whole situation developed. One minute I'm talking with a nice family while they're taking a picture and petting my dog and about half a minute later I turn around to a drawn pistol. I do want to stress that it was pointed downward below and in front of my feet and not sighted on me. Although that didn't make me feel comfortable at the time, still doesn't. I'll be honest, I don't even like the sound of the word lawsuit, but on the other hand I'm not pleased that there was no apology or any attempt to verbally make amends to a situation that was poorly handled on their part and the thought of me or anyone going through this again because they still don't understand the laws they're paid to enforce is frustrating to say the least.

    I was told that I was being detained so it could be determined that I wasn't a felon and was lawfully carrying.
    Last edited by Lokster; 07-03-2011 at 01:00 AM. Reason: forgot to answer your question

  6. #6
    Lone Star Veteran Ian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    712
    Quote Originally Posted by thebigsd View Post
    Wow. Sounds like you handled everything great. And it appears the officers made the right choice in the end. As a precaution, I would FOIA all of the communications and documentation related to your detainment. Glad you came out ok! Were you recording or is that not allowed in CO?
    To answer your last question. Colorado only requires that one party be aware of a recorded conversation. Since he is the one doing the recording, obviously he is aware and it is fine.

  7. #7
    Regular Member GvdM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    43
    Glad you came out of that unfortunate encounter safely. I am not sure how I would have reacted. You kept a cool head and stood up for your rights. I only hope to conduct myself in the same manner if I ever encounter a situation like that. I have been carrying for about 35 years now and never had an encounter outside of normal citizens with questions based on their own curiosity.

    I agree with M-Taliesin and would be talking to an attorney or at least file a complaint with the chief of Police there. The more I have been reading on forums like these the more I am considering a recorder.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Lokster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Unincorporated Jefferson County
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian View Post
    To answer your last question. Colorado only requires that one party be aware of a recorded conversation. Since he is the one doing the recording, obviously he is aware and it is fine.
    Thank you, Ian. My head was still spinning from all the questions I received yesterday and missed one! Now that it has settled down, probably due to a good nights rest I will continue celebrating liberty on this Independence Day weekend!

    Quote Originally Posted by GvdM View Post
    Glad you came out of that unfortunate encounter safely. I am not sure how I would have reacted. You kept a cool head and stood up for your rights. I only hope to conduct myself in the same manner if I ever encounter a situation like that. I have been carrying for about 35 years now and never had an encounter outside of normal citizens with questions based on their own curiosity.

    I agree with M-Taliesin and would be talking to an attorney or at least file a complaint with the chief of Police there. The more I have been reading on forums like these the more I am considering a recorder.
    I will likely be doing both early next week. I recommend carrying a recorder whenever one OC. All it takes is one uninformed officer and from my experience there are plenty in CO.

  9. #9
    Regular Member M-Taliesin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aurora, Colorado
    Posts
    1,504
    Quote Originally Posted by Lokster View Post
    Howdy M-Taliesin, thanks for your kind words. I'm still finding it difficult to believe how the whole situation developed. One minute I'm talking with a nice family while they're taking a picture and petting my dog and about half a minute later I turn around to a drawn pistol. I do want to stress that it was pointed downward below and in front of my feet and not sighted on me. Although that didn't make me feel comfortable at the time, still doesn't. I'll be honest, I don't even like the sound of the word lawsuit, but on the other hand I'm not pleased that there was no apology or any attempt to verbally make amends to a situation that was poorly handled on their part and the thought of me or anyone going through this again because they still don't understand the laws they're paid to enforce is frustrating to say the least.

    I was told that I was being detained so it could be determined that I wasn't a felon and was lawfully carrying.
    Howdy Lockster!
    I highlighted specific portions of your response to my reply in order to address those specific points. Let's start with the first one.

    You turn to discover an officer with a drawn pistol. Regardless of where it was pointed, it was both a direct and overt threat to you in particular, and public safety in general. Cops have a history of accidental discharge too. It is a basic rule that you do not draw your weapon unless you are prepared to fire it. You were going about your law abiding business only to be confronted with a threat against your life and liberty. Even with the weapon pointed at the ground (I assume pavement or concrete) an accidental richochet would bounce straight up and hit.... YOU!!! Unacceptable behavior.

    If you do not like the word lawsuit, I understand. Call it what it really is, and what the founding fathers called it: Redress of grievances. That is the Constitutional method for dealing with violation of your rights. Redress of grievances is to hold the government (and its agents) responsible for such violations. It is the responsibility of the citizen thus abused to exercise their right to petion the government for redress of such grievance. Otherwise, it is tantamont to defacto abdication of those rights by tacit consent (they got away with it, ergo will continue to usurp such rights).

    the next point is that law enforcement officers are oathbound to support and defend the constitution of the United States and whatever jurisdiction they serve. They have sworn an oath before God to defend your rights, not abuse them. God may hold them accountable in the next life, but you must act in defense of your rights in this one.

    Finally, how many other citizens did they stop that day to determine whether they might be a feleon? Just you? Because you were armed against assault by a felon? Well, you were feloniously (in my opinion) threatened. So who's the felon at the outset? In addition, you were not engaged in the commission of a crime, so where is their RAS to confront you, let alone with drawn weapons? Considering they never learned your identity, they never did figure out whether you were a felon or not. Therefore, the whole stop was silly, a waste of everybody's time, an infringement on your rights and a threat against your life (drawn weapon).

    When police officers violate the law, there is no law. Hold them to account.
    And it is terrific you got the recording. Way to go amigo!

    Best of luck and continued happy OC'ing and safe travels.

    Blessings,
    M-Taliesin
    Last edited by M-Taliesin; 07-03-2011 at 10:01 AM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Lokster View Post
    I'm not going to say that I handled the situation perfectly because in some ways it did catch me somewhat off guard, not unprepared however; and I would add that anytime all parties involved leave peacefully after a firearm has been un-holstered and drawn is a good outcome although it probably could have been handled better by all parties.

    Alright, now that my disclaimer is out of the way I'll go into the details as this event occurred around an hour or so ago at Belmar in Lakewood. Before I start however I will say that I have been open carrying on the public grounds at Belmar for months now. It is a fun place to walk the dog as he gets plenty of attention from people who are shopping and out and about like myself. During a handful of previous visits I have encountered the private security for Belmar and Lakewood police officers who were driving by and noticing either me or my dog, or both and but have never stopped to make contact.

    After walking the dog around for awhile we decided to stop near Target, but in the public area where the water fountain is setup. Loki, my dog, was thirsty and he was wetting his whistle at the fountain while all of the sudden I heard from behind me to keep my hand away from my hip. I instantly turned around and there was a Lakewood police officer no more than twenty five feet behind me with his gun drawn and at low ready. After he told me to sit down that is when the questions started, "Do you have a CCW?", I was then ordered to grab my wallet and ID because, " I would have to be identified."

    I declined and mentioned that there was no reason for me to provide identification. At that point another officer came up behind me and told me to put my hands on top of my head, while grabbing my hands and placing them there himself. He then told me that he was just going to grab it for me and he started to poke around in my pockets. I mentioned to him that he was grabbing my wallet without my consent. He let up for minute while the other officer told me that I was not allowed to open carry a firearm in the Belmar area. I told him twice that it's not posted anywhere. A third officer then told me to relax though I don't believe I was tense. After I told her that there was no reason I was being detained I was told by her that they were making sure that I wasn't a felon.

    I then asked her if I was then free to go and I was asked if I was willing to give up my name. I told her that there is no reason that I should provide a name for doing nothing wrong. Officer number two mentioned that it made sense to me to give them my name because I was carrying a firearm and my not be allowed to. He then told me that he needed to verify that I was allowed to be carrying. I asked him to provide me with a statute and he came back with "it's prohibited use of a firearm by a felon." and because he hasn't identified me he doesn't know that I'm not a felon. Once again he said, "I need to identify you." I said that I will not be providing ID since I've asked twice what I've done wrong and have received no answer. After asking to move to a spot away from the water so my dog would quit drinking water and moving I asked if I could remove my hands from my head. The officer said, "Not yet."

    Then the female officer after being silent from being on the phone for several minutes asked me if I lived around there. I said I won't be answering that either because I've done nothing wrong. One of the other male officers told me that it was posted all over the garage that no firearms are allowed. I said that we are not in the garage. Then it changed to, "You cannot walk around the Belmar area with an open firearm." I then asked that they would call a supervisor immediately and was told that one was in route. I was told to relax again even though I had places that I needed to be and was being held up. Then I was asked to give a fake name so that they could converse with me. I got a little sarcastic, but basically said that that wasn't a good idea. I was then told that I would be removed from private areas and I said then I will leave willingly. He said that if I live in the area I wouldn't be able to come back. The female officer finally got off the phone and told me to go ahead and head out while reminding me of the signs posted in the garage and that everything was fine since I didn't have my firearm concealed and I was in a public area. She also reminded me that in the future I would probably have a "hard time because I was open carrying".

    I mentioned that there was no reason why I was responded to in such a manner as I was. I reminded her that I committed no crime and was being detained. She mentioned that it was, "a kind of grey area." I was asked to listen for a minute while she explained to me "the dangers of our world". After another minute or two of dialogue she finished and told me that if I have places to go I need to "head out" again.

    Another officer then chimed in explaining how if I would have given him my name when he walked up and mentioned how I hold a CCW (even though I wasn't CC) he wouldn't have become suspicious and that because he didn't know who I was he needed dispatch to pull some information. I told him that I would never give my name just because. The female officer then told me to "head out" oh and "have a good night." I then asked her if where we were located right now was public property and she responded that it was. The she ended the whole ordeal with "that is why I am telling you that we are done and you are no longer being detained." Then I got up and walked away.

    I'm sure I provided quite the show for the few dozen people watching at a cafe in the distance. There were at least four LEO who were at the scene as well as another 3 or so Belmar security personnel. As I say, I had a feeling I'd have a LE encounter at some point or another, but never thought it would happen like that and at Belmar of all places.
    Colorado law is clear that Terry applies, 100%. If they had no RAS, they unlawfully detained you. Stop and ID in CO MUST have the element of RAS. Checking to see "if you are a felon" is not RAS, it is illegal detention, search and seizure. You should immediately file a complaint with the cops and the DA. Your rights under State and Federal law were clearly violated. In the circumstances, you handled it very well. But next time, remember Terry and RAS. That should be the first thing you say to the cop: "What RAS do you have for detaining me? Colorado does not allow stop and ID lacking that element." I should add that aiming a loaded gun at you in these circumstances is outrageous and the tort of assault. Just because he's a cop doesn't give him the right to threaten deadly force unless a felony has been or is being committed. When filing the complaint, indicate that you will be seeking counsel with the intention of filing suit against the cops and the town.
    Last edited by Gunslinger; 07-03-2011 at 12:22 PM.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  11. #11
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    [snip] Checking to see "if you are a felon" is not RAS, it is illegal detention, search and seizure. [snip]
    Not being argumentative, but I need a link to case law that shows that LEO does not have the right to see if an open carrier is a felon. Does Terry say that?

    Seems to me that given it is illegal for a felon to possess a firearm, that there may be a logical reason to determine if an OCer has a felonious history, even absent the RAS defined in Terry.

    I guess what I am really looking for is what to say to a LEO who stops me and says, "I don't know who you are or if you are a felon, therefore you must show me ID so I can determine that you are not prohibited from possessing a firearm."

    I bolded the phrase because it seems to me that it's different than being allowed to carry a firearm, which is our right in many states.

    It just seems to me that this has become a standard phrase that LEOs have been taught to use when confronting an OCer, much like they seem to have been taught to yell "Stop resisting!" when they are cuffing a detainee, whether the detainee is resisting or not, just in case anyone is observing or recording.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Avon, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    53

  13. #13
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by M-Taliesin
    If you do not like the word lawsuit, I understand. Call it what it really is, and what the founding fathers called it: Redress of grievances. That is the Constitutional method for dealing with violation of your rights. Redress of grievances is to hold the government (and its agents) responsible for such violations. It is the responsibility of the citizen thus abused to exercise their right to petion the government for redress of such grievance. Otherwise, it is tantamont to defacto abdication of those rights by tacit consent (they got away with it, ergo will continue to usurp such rights).
    AMEN!!! :clapping:
    Esp. with their threat that you will be harrassed again, I'd sit down w/ a lawyer on Tues.
    Do an ORR & get it in the mailbox at the main PO today or tomorrow so it gets picked up first thing Tues.

    Finally, how many other citizens did they stop that day to determine whether they might be a felon?
    Exactly. Did they stop anyone w/ a child, to be sure they child hadn't been kidnapped, or the adult wasn't a convicted abuser, prohibited from contact w/ a child?
    Did they pull over people driving nearby, to be sure the car wasn't stolen or the driver had a valid license? (Oops, they can't do that - it's illegal! See below.)
    Did they stop people carrying concealed, to make sure they weren't felons?

    If they'd recognized you from a wanted poster, or from prior interaction (a DV incident, or seeing you in jail) I think that could have given them RAS that you might be a prohibited person.

    But to stop someone simply and solely for the peaceful exercise of a protected right is wrong.
    SCOTUS says so:
    "The Claim and exercise of a Constitutional Right cannot be converted into a crime."
    Miller v. U.S., 230 F 2d 486. 489

    “Selective prosecution when referring to the decision to prosecute in retaliation for the exercise of a constitutional right gives rise to an actionable right under the constitution."
    County of Kenosha v. C. & S. Management, Inc. 223 Wis. 2d 373, 588 N.W.2d 236 (1999), 97−0642

    "Stopping a car for no other reason than to check the license and registration was unreasonable under the 4th amendment."
    Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979).

    "The mere presence of firearms does not create exigent circumstances."
    WI v. Kiekhefer, 212 Wis. 2d 460, 569 N.W.2d 316 (Ct. App. 1997), 96-2052.

    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby
    Not being argumentative, but I need a link to case law that shows that LEO does not have the right to see if an open carrier is a felon.
    See Terry.
    Absent RAS of a crime, which can include personal knowledge of the officer that the OCer is a prohibited person, an officer cannot have a nonconsensual interaction.
    Pointing a gun at him, ordering him about, physically grabbing & searching him were all definitely NONCONSENSUAL.

    Since driving on public roads requires a permit,
    & officers aren't allowed to stop a car being driven on public roads only to check that permit,
    and OC doesn't require a permit,
    WHY would a LEO think it's OK to stop someone who's not committing a crime just to run a background check?

    From the link in post #12:
    St. John v. McColley (Alomogordo)
    "Mr. St. John’s lawful possession of a loaded firearm in a crowded place could not, by itself, create a reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify an investigatory detention."

    United States v. Ubiles, 224 F.3d 213 (3rd Cir. 2000):
    The Third Circuit found that an individual’s lawful possession of a firearm in a crowded place did not justify a search or seizure.

    United States v. King, 990 F.2d 1552 (10th Cir. 1993)
    The Tenth Circuit found that an investigatory detention initiated by an officer after he discovered that the defendant lawfully possessed a loaded firearm lacked sufficient basis because the firearm alone did not create a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
    Last edited by MKEgal; 07-03-2011 at 03:45 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.

  14. #14
    Regular Member yotebuster223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lakewood, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    21

    Very Disappointing

    I am an amateur radio operator who enjoys monitoring Lakewood PD frequencies. I also monitor the South sector dispatch since I live in the area. A couple of weeks ago I heard one of the very same Agents that contacted you call on the radio that there was a man walking a large dog with a pistol in a holster on his hip through Belmar the Agent stated that the male was walking and not causing any problems just to inform dispatch. I remember telling my wife about the Agents reaction to an OCer and how pleased I was with his restraint. So yesterday when I heard the call I was very surprised to hear the same Agent that saw you two weeks ago was part of this TAKE DOWN TEAM. I knew you were a seasoned OCer when I heard that a Sergeant was requested and when one of the male officer called out in a huff that he was clear when the Sergeant called on scene that this was a HUGE mishandling on their part. Look I support and appreciate the professionalism of the Lakewood Police Department that is why I am surprised and disappointed in the serious lack of restraint by these Agents to your Constitutional Rights. I will whole heartedly support a decision to obtain counsel and hold these Agents accountable for their lack of professionalism that they must adhere to on a daily bases. Please keep us informed about this and continue to OC in Belmar because your story inspires me to OC in Belmar more frequently. If you PM me I might be able to give you info that could help with some of your info search.
    Last edited by yotebuster223; 07-03-2011 at 06:32 PM.

  15. #15
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Brass View Post
    Thanks for posting this, it verified my understanding of Terry. I'm not sure that it answered my basic question, though. Let me try again:

    Open Carry is legal.

    Felons may not possess a firearm.

    Officer sees someone he does not know, openly carrying.

    Not knowing the OCer, why is the LEO not allowed to ask for ID to determine if the OCer is a prohibited person or not?

    Or, is criminal possession of a firearm an add-on charge once the felon has been apprehended committing a crime while in possession of a firearm?

    Not being able to ask an OCer for ID would seem to be giving a certain degree of cover to a felon who is carrying.

    I can see both sides of the argument.

  16. #16
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    Look at it this way... You are eating lunch in McDonald's with your kids. Cops approach you, tell you to provide them identification and some type of identification for your children. Maybe ask you to call someone who can verify that the children are yours. Is that OK? Why don't they have the authority to do that to everyone who has kids with them in McDonald's? After all, kidnapping is a felony and how do the police know that you aren't a kidnapper?

    In this country, so far, police need reasonable and articulable suspicion of a crime in order to detain a person for any purpose. According to your argument, JamesCanby, the firearm really has NOTHING to do with it. Any person walking down the street may be a person with a warrant out for their arrest. So, according to your theory, the police should be able to stop anyone in public to identify themselves and check for warrants. The gun has nothing to do with it.

    It is impossible for me to see both sides of the argument, and luckily, those that wrote the Bill of Rights couldn't see both sides either.
    Ok, that's helpful. Going back to my original question, i.e., when confronted by a LEO's request for ID to see if I'm a felon, my response should be, "Unless you have RAS that I AM a felon, you have no basis for demanding my ID." Yes?

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    Ok, that's helpful. Going back to my original question, i.e., when confronted by a LEO's request for ID to see if I'm a felon, my response should be, "Unless you have RAS that I AM a felon, you have no basis for demanding my ID." Yes?
    That's exactly what I would say? You could also ask "Am I required by law to show you my identification?" They answer no in which case you are good. If they say yes ask them "can you show me the law where it says that." Of course they can't and if you have them recorded then you have caught them in a lie.
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  18. #18
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    Not being argumentative, but I need a link to case law that shows that LEO does not have the right to see if an open carrier is a felon. Does Terry say that?

    Seems to me that given it is illegal for a felon to possess a firearm, that there may be a logical reason to determine if an OCer has a felonious history, even absent the RAS defined in Terry.

    I guess what I am really looking for is what to say to a LEO who stops me and says, "I don't know who you are or if you are a felon, therefore you must show me ID so I can determine that you are not prohibited from possessing a firearm."

    I bolded the phrase because it seems to me that it's different than being allowed to carry a firearm, which is our right in many states.

    It just seems to me that this has become a standard phrase that LEOs have been taught to use when confronting an OCer, much like they seem to have been taught to yell "Stop resisting!" when they are cuffing a detainee, whether the detainee is resisting or not, just in case anyone is observing or recording.
    Colo. Rev. Stat. 16-3-103(1)


    In order to lawfully detain an individual for questioning: (1) A police officer must have a reasonable suspicion that the individual has committed, or is about to commit, a crime; (2) the purpose of the detention must be reasonable; and (3) the character of the detention must be reasonable when considered in light of the purpose. People v. Stevens, 183 Colo. 399, 517 P.2d 1336 (1973); People v. Montoya, 185 Colo. 299, 524 P.2d 76 (1974); People v. Mascarenas, 726 P.2d 644 (Colo. 1986); People v. Ratcliff, 778 P.2d 1371 (Colo. 1989); People v. Wilson, 784 P.2d 325 (Colo. 1989); People v. Sutherland, 886 P.2d 681 (Colo. 1994); People v. Rodriguez, 924 P.2d 1100 (Colo. App. 1996), aff'd, 945 P.2d 1351 (Colo. 1997).

    That enough?



    The first of these requirements is determined by whether there were specific and articulable facts known to the officer, which taken together with rational inferences from these facts, created a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to justify the intrusion into the defendant's personal security. People v. Mascarenas, 726 P.2d 644 (Colo. 1986); People v. Wilson, 784 P.2d 325 (Colo. 1989).
    Last edited by Gunslinger; 07-03-2011 at 07:41 PM.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  19. #19
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    Thanks for posting this, it verified my understanding of Terry. I'm not sure that it answered my basic question, though. Let me try again:

    Open Carry is legal.

    Felons may not possess a firearm.

    Officer sees someone he does not know, openly carrying.

    Not knowing the OCer, why is the LEO not allowed to ask for ID to determine if the OCer is a prohibited person or not?

    Or, is criminal possession of a firearm an add-on charge once the felon has been apprehended committing a crime while in possession of a firearm?

    Not being able to ask an OCer for ID would seem to be giving a certain degree of cover to a felon who is carrying.

    I can see both sides of the argument.
    It is NOT my responsibility to PROVE MY INNOCENCE. It is the responsibility of the State or it's agents to PROVE MY GUILT. So just because "he doesn't know me" and I am carrying a properly holstered firearm actually strengthens my case that HE HAS NO EVIDENCE or REASONABLE ARTICULABLE SUSPICION that I am a felon in possession of a firearm and as such he can REQUEST id from me and I am fully in my rights to tell him to go squat someplace! He can ASK for ID but I am under NO obligation to provide UNLESS there is a properly supported Stop and ID statute in place.
    In my home state of Utah, IF I am suspected of having just committed, in the process of commiting, or about to commit a crime that the officer can reasonably articulate then I can be detained and the officer can demand my name and an explanation of what I am doing.--- Note, it does not say that I have to provide a state issued ID, only a verbal statement from me about my name and what I am doing. Could be as simple as, "I am "JoeSparky" and I am walking northbound on this street!"
    Last edited by JoeSparky; 07-03-2011 at 08:15 PM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member TheLittleMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    40
    I have only had my holster for my gun a few days so i haven't had much chance to OC yet but this was always a concern of mine. I have a new born baby so i wanna carry but i don't want to have to worry a cop might shoot me out of suspicion.

    This story and entire thread has enlightened me to what might happen and what i should do incase it does. Thanks everyone for that, I'm now more confident about OCing, and i WILL be OCing next time i head to Belmar.

  21. #21
    Regular Member RandallFlagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    125
    This was at the Bel Mar Park at Alameda and Wadsworth? Right by the Lakewood Police Station?
    If so, you and I need to meet up there someday.
    OPEN CARRYING, of course.
    Why do I have a bar in my home? Because it's cheaper to stock a bar than to get a DUI.

  22. #22
    Regular Member RandallFlagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by M-Taliesin View Post
    This is even more egregious than the Longmont incident
    Oh, I've GOT to hear about this. Please do tell?
    Why do I have a bar in my home? Because it's cheaper to stock a bar than to get a DUI.

  23. #23
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543

    Thanks... I get it.

    Many thanks to those who have helped me to understand this topic, and even though I am hoping that I never have to use what I've learned, at least I am better prepared and have more confidence in that potential interaction. OCDO is a great resource.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    So, in Washington, the answer would be, "Officer, you write me a citation for the law you think I am breaking and I will show you my ID. Otherwise, have a nice day."
    I like that.

    Look at it this way... You are eating lunch in McDonald's with your kids. Cops approach you, tell you to provide them identification and some type of identification for your children. Maybe ask you to call someone who can verify that the children are yours. Is that OK? Why don't they have the authority to do that to everyone who has kids with them in McDonald's? After all, kidnapping is a felony and how do the police know that you aren't a kidnapper?
    This is a reason among others I don't go to Chuck E. Cheese. Or as my youngest calls it and I am loathe to discourage her, Yucky Cheese.

    A few years ago, we went there when visiting my mother and they apparently stamp all the kids and parents with matching numbers. I was separated from DW and kids when we went in. When we left, DW sent me to load the oldest in the car while she gathered stuff up. A woman stopped me and said something along the lines of "You can't leave with her." There was some exchange explaining the numbers and me saying I hadn't gotten one. She was getting more agressive and said something further about not letting me leave with what was visibly my daughter. I was about to ask her how exactly she intended to stop me when DW arrived with the younger and flashed her number and we left. I would have loved for her to get physical on behalf of her employer or call the police to enforce their magic rubber stamp policy on me. Or rather the empty parking space.

    I could appreciate the spirit of the policy, but this woman's attitude was much more about enforcing it for the sake of enforcing it rather than protecting my child.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187
    Quote Originally Posted by RandallFlagg View Post
    Oh, I've GOT to hear about this. Please do tell?
    Longmont or Loveland?

    SOW, Lokster, check with Billy for his lawyer's info if you do decide that drawing a weapon on you for walking your dog is worth pursuing legal action to retrain the officers.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •