Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 102

Thread: Question about a LEO stop while OC'ing.

  1. #1
    Regular Member Woody1960's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    11

    Question about a LEO stop while OC'ing.

    Hello,new here.Lots of good reading here. I have had my CPL for 6-7 years now and carry when I can.{cant carry while working} I do OC in the yard and around the house But no further yet.Guess I am not quite ready for that yet.I do have a question about OCing though.I know I will prolly get flamed for this question. I know it's all about our rights, but, when you get stopped for OC, why not just show the officer your id an be on your way? Whats the big deal? I know,I know it's about our rights. But really? Isn't their job is hard enough, why make a big deal and cause a big scene and look like a moron to the bystanders? Am I missing something here? They are just doing their job by investigating a call they got.After all thats why we pay their salary isnt it? BTW, no I am not a LEO.Thats just a question I have had for a quite some time now. I was on you tube watching some more video's on the subject. And it got me thinking about it again.Thanks, Woody
    Last edited by Woody1960; 07-10-2011 at 12:42 PM.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Welcome to OCDO!!! The main reason people are opposed to showing their ID is because there is usually no legal requirement that they do so. Police officers should not be stopping and OCer simply because they have a gun. They need to have a legitimate reason. If you were being hassled by any other person you wouldn't stand for it. Why should the police be any different?
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  3. #3
    Regular Member Woody1960's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    Why do you equate my polite and respectful refusal to waive my rights at the first request of a stranger wearing a uniform and a badge to "make a big deal and cause a big scene and look like a moron to the bystanders?" Why are you attaching the negatives to the citizen who is engaging in perfectly legal behavior AND supporting and the defending the Constitution of the United States and the rights that are protected therein?

    Police are paid to investigate CRIMES. Their job is hard enough already, they don't need to be investigating people engaged in legal and normal behaviors and the sooner they move on from people that are engaged in legal and normal behaviors, then they can actually start investigating crimes. Look at it this way, by refusing to show ID when I am not required to, I am saving the taxpayers money and resources. I have saved the dispatchers time in running my name and driver's license number. I have saved radio traffic in all the interactions that go on with that. Am I being detained? Have a nice day.
    Thanks for the replys guys. I understand OC'ers are doing nothing wrong, but if the police dont check id whats to stop a bad guy from carring just like the OC'er is? I dont mean to attach negatives to citizen doing something leagle. I guess the way I see it is, I would rather just show him id and be on my way,then have 5 cars show up and really waste tax dollars.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Woody1960 View Post
    Thanks for the replys guys. I understand OC'ers are doing nothing wrong, but if the police dont check id whats to stop a bad guy from carring just like the OC'er is? I dont mean to attach negatives to citizen doing something leagle. I guess the way I see it is, I would rather just show him id and be on my way,then have 5 cars show up and really waste tax dollars.
    Nothing. But, look at my sig.

    Give LE your ID without cause, and you help them believe that they can.

    As for "stop a bad guy...." go watch "Minority Report." Cops investigate crimes, not prevent crimes.
    Last edited by wrightme; 07-10-2011 at 02:27 PM.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,182
    Quote Originally Posted by Woody1960 View Post
    Thanks for the replys guys. I understand OC'ers are doing nothing wrong, but if the police dont check id whats to stop a bad guy from carring just like the OC'er is? I dont mean to attach negatives to citizen doing something leagle. I guess the way I see it is, I would rather just show him id and be on my way,then have 5 cars show up and really waste tax dollars.
    Why don't you just allow the police to go door to door searching homes... just in case they might find a 'bad guy'? Surely you wouldn't mind that, would you?

    If a person is doing nothing illegal, regardless of what lawful item they are carrying at the time, why should the police even approach them in the first place?

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lyman, Maine
    Posts
    905
    Quote Originally Posted by Woody1960 View Post
    Thanks for the replys guys. I understand OC'ers are doing nothing wrong, but if the police dont check id whats to stop a bad guy from carring just like the OC'er is? I dont mean to attach negatives to citizen doing something leagle. I guess the way I see it is, I would rather just show him id and be on my way,then have 5 cars show up and really waste tax dollars.
    I would contend that if a bad guy is carrying like an OCer (ie. firearm in holster, not waving it around at people, not threatening anyone) then are they really being a bad guy??? The person doesn't turn into a bad guy until he breaks the law.

  7. #7
    Regular Member M-Taliesin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aurora, Colorado
    Posts
    1,504
    Howdy Pardner!
    I am delighted to see that you didn't get a flame festival going, despite your questions. The reason for that is that we don't behave that way around these parts. Ain't nobody gonna flame you for a legitimate question, and yours was just fine. After all, if you don't ask, you won't know.

    Now to the topic at hand.

    Imagine the uproar if police officers started stopping every car simply to check whether the driver is legally authorized to drive? After all, he may be a felon on his way to a robbery. Maybe he's a rapist who just got done brutalizing some college gal and was on his way home after a busy day. More likely than not, he is just a law abiding citizen driving his car as he goes about his law abiding day.

    The number of similies can go on ad infinitum, but I believe the point is likely obvious here. Without Reasonable and Articulatable Suspicion (RAS) that you're committing a crime, have committed a crime, or are about to do so, they have no legitimate reason to detain you, even briefly. They must have RAS and in some cases, probable cause. Maybe you just had an altercation with a neighbor and he calls in claiming you've threatened him. Police at that point have probable cause to investigate the situation.

    The courts have ruled, and many threads on this forum recount those rulings in great detail, that the simple carrying of a handgun is not reasonable cause to stop a citizen or detain them for questioning. They must have RAS to stop you. That applies to any detention, regardless of brevity. They just do not have the right to interfere with a legal activity. These issues have been decided in District Courts of the United States, and decision upheld in Supreme Court decisions time and again.

    But let us consider the intent of the officer who approaches you. What is he hoping for? A reason to arrest you. He isn't interested in wasting his time or yours, so unless he can make an arrest or issue a citation, it is a waste of his time and he knows it going in. From the word "go", he can and will use anything you say against you, no matter how innocent it may appear to you, your response should be to stand on the 5th Amendment and refuse to speak. Other than asking him the simple questions "am I being detained?" and "Am I free to go", one of the first things to ask if you can't simply walk away is "What is your RAS?" If they can't articulate one for you, they can't very well articulate it in court either.

    Defense attorneys have pounded on the concept of remaining silent. Once you give up your right to remain silent, you open Pandora's box of troubles and additional abuses. Anything that infringes on your rights under the Constitution and State Constitution, and applicable local laws not preempted, you may find yourself sitting in a jail cell while protesting your innocence of any wrong doing. The sad part of that scenario is, you'll have done it to yourself by trying to appear cooperative.

    Cop: Can I see some identification please?
    You: Sure officer, I'm a terrific citizen!
    Cop: Let me just check it out and you'll be on your way.
    Cop: Unit 1. This is Delta Indigo Charlie Kilo. Need a check on this individual.
    As it turns out, there is a warrant for a guy who committed a crime who just happens to have the same name as you do. Sexual assault on a child, no less. Still at large.
    Cop: Is your name Harvey Smith?
    You: Yes sir, I surely am. See how law abiding I really am?
    Cop: Well sir, we have your name on a warrant and you'll need to turn around and put your hands behind your back.
    You: Wait... there must be some mistake!
    Cop: You'll have plenty of time to talk about that down at headquarters. Here, let me just slip these cuffs on you, disarm you of a dangerous weapon and slide you into my patrol car. We're going downtown.

    Okay, that was a ridiculous simplification, but in reality, there are actual instances where such things have happened. Sure, this man will eventually clear himself and everybody will have a great laugh over this case of mistaken identity. Then again, you've been treated to the plush accomodations of your city bed and breakfast. 3 hots and a cot. Now that's good living.

    So you call a defense attorney. First thing he wants to know... "What did you tell them?" The second thing you'll hear him say is ****!

    I myself found another individual living in the same city as me who has the same name as me. If I give I.D. to the cops, they see the name, I am likely to be investigated for anything that other guy might have done. And if I end up sitting in jail while entirely innocent of any wrong, them's the berries.

    Meanwhile, I may incur a fairly substantial cost in terms of money, time, reputation and inconvenience that was entirely unnecessary. My cooperation giving my I.D. just led to a crime committed by somebody else with the same name, and now I'm stuck with proving my innocence. Isn't it better to stand by your rights under the 4th, 5th and other Constitutional Amendments than cooperate your way out of a jam?

    Blessings,
    M-Taliesin
    Last edited by M-Taliesin; 07-10-2011 at 03:34 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member MarkD51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sheboygan Wisconsin
    Posts
    50
    I'm not at all in disagreement about what has been said about a legal citizen's open carry rights, and a citizen's right to privacy.

    But my assumptions, and suspicions about LEO's are this.....

    That I would like to ask others here, that in 100 instances, where an LEO approaches a Citizen, legally carrying, and the Citizen then asks, or informs the LEO of his/her right to privacy, and "am I being stopped-questioned for any laws broken?", that in how many of those instances, will an LEO honestly confide, that he only stopped to question you, and asked for ID out of a personal curiosity?

    That won't the LEO say in all 100 of those instances, that, "We got a call about a suspicious person with a gun'?

    Yes, in probably a large majority of those stops, the LEO may indeed be lying, due to a need to legally protect themselves, and their departments, but then, where does your legal rights lay-end, to then question the validity of an armed LEO's claims to such?

    That I myself can easily visualize here in NM, the first time I OC, I probably won't be able to walk a block, before this scenario I mention above would occur exactly to the T.

    After I ask an LEO "have I done anything wrong officer, why am I being stopped?", and they come out with this typical "line" mentioned above, I don't think I'd be feeling very comfortable in a one on one "Johnny Ringo" scenario, two armed people, me, and an LEO face to face. They way police have been shooting legal OC people in this country, I'd suspect they'd be drawing their weapons on me in a heartbeat, and at that point, I have just placed my own life in very severe danger.

    (PS: Well, maybe I'd feel a little more comfortable, if my name was "Bob Munden"! lol) Mark
    Mark
    Last edited by MarkD51; 07-10-2011 at 09:48 PM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    what a load of FUD!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkD51 View Post
    I'm not at all in disagreement about what has been said about a legal citizen's open carry rights, and a citizen's right to privacy.

    But my assumptions, and suspicions about LEO's are this.....

    That I would like to ask others here, that in 100 instances, where an LEO approaches a Citizen, legally carrying, and the Citizen then asks, or informs the LEO of his/her right to privacy, and "am I being stopped-questioned for any laws broken?", that in how many of those instances, will an LEO honestly confide, that he only stopped to question you, and asked for ID out of a personal curiosity?

    That won't the LEO say in all 100 of those instances, that, "We got a call about a suspicious person with a gun'?

    Yes, in probably a large majority of those stops, the LEO may indeed be lying, due to a need to legally protect themselves, and their departments, but then, where does your legal rights lay-end, to then question the validity of an armed LEO's claims to such?

    That I myself can easily visualize here in NM, the first time I OC, I probably won't be able to walk a block, before this scenario I mention above would occur exactly to the T.

    After I ask an LEO "have I done anything wrong officer, why am I being stopped?", and they come out with this typical "line" mentioned above, I don't think I'd be feeling very comfortable in a one on one "Johnny Ringo" scenario, two armed people, me, and an LEO face to face. They way police have been shooting legal OC people in this country, I'd suspect they'd be drawing their weapons on me in a heartbeat, and at that point, I have just placed my own life in very severe danger.

    (PS: Well, maybe I'd feel a little more comfortable, if my name was "Bob Munden"! lol) Mark
    Mark
    CITE!!! no OCers have been shot. You spew BJLL SHlT!!!
    and your own alamagordo courts and the appellate courts have ruled clearly,,,
    leave OCers alone, carrying a gun is lawful activity!
    look up o'hare V. alamagordo, from just last year, OCer paid 21000$ settlement by cops!!

    are you a WAVE, jeriboniva, ANTI liberal leftist, brady plant?
    try to find some creditability and facts,,, otherwise..
    GET OFF MY LAWN!!!
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkD51 View Post
    I'm not at all in disagreement about what has been said about a legal citizen's open carry rights, and a citizen's right to privacy.

    But my assumptions, and suspicions about LEO's are this.....

    That I would like to ask others here, that in 100 instances, where an LEO approaches a Citizen, legally carrying, and the Citizen then asks, or informs the LEO of his/her right to privacy, and "am I being stopped-questioned for any laws broken?", that in how many of those instances, will an LEO honestly confide, that he only stopped to question you, and asked for ID out of a personal curiosity?

    That won't the LEO say in all 100 of those instances, that, "We got a call about a suspicious person with a gun'?
    It doesn't matter. It isn't a crime to be armed.

    And, even then, unless there is a specific statutory requirement to "ID" oneself to LE, it typically ONLY applies to stating your true name and ONLY IF there is actual suspicion of a crime.

    See the part about "it isn't a crime to be armed."

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkD51

    Yes, in probably a large majority of those stops, the LEO may indeed be lying, due to a need to legally protect themselves, and their departments, but then, where does your legal rights lay-end, to then question the validity of an armed LEO's claims to such?
    Am I free to leave?

    Unless the answer is "no," leave.

    If the answer is "yes," you are being detained, and should cease all communication with the LE.

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkD51
    That I myself can easily visualize here in NM, the first time I OC, I probably won't be able to walk a block, before this scenario I mention above would occur exactly to the T.

    After I ask an LEO "have I done anything wrong officer, why am I being stopped?", and they come out with this typical "line" mentioned above, I don't think I'd be feeling very comfortable in a one on one "Johnny Ringo" scenario, two armed people, me, and an LEO face to face. They way police have been shooting legal OC people in this country, I'd suspect they'd be drawing their weapons on me in a heartbeat, and at that point, I have just placed my own life in very severe danger.

    (PS: Well, maybe I'd feel a little more comfortable, if my name was "Bob Munden"! lol) Mark
    Mark
    The ONLY reasons to stay "face to face" in such an instance is if you are being detained. Otherwise, you are free to go about your business. If the LE prevents you from going about your business, you are being detained. Refer to the part about "and should cease all communication with the LE."
    Last edited by wrightme; 07-10-2011 at 10:29 PM.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  11. #11
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Woody1960 View Post
    Hello,new here.Lots of good reading here. I have had my CPL for 6-7 years now and carry when I can.{cant carry while working} I do OC in the yard and around the house But no further yet.Guess I am not quite ready for that yet.I do have a question about OCing though.I know I will prolly get flamed for this question. I know it's all about our rights, but, when you get stopped for OC, why not just show the officer your id an be on your way? Whats the big deal? I know,I know it's about our rights. But really? Isn't their job is hard enough, why make a big deal and cause a big scene and look like a moron to the bystanders? Am I missing something here? They are just doing their job by investigating a call they got.After all thats why we pay their salary isnt it? BTW, no I am not a LEO.Thats just a question I have had for a quite some time now. I was on you tube watching some more video's on the subject. And it got me thinking about it again.Thanks, Woody
    Your post make perfect sense to me, Woody!

    I believe a person really has to have a big "chip on their shoulder" to purposefully infuriate a law enforcement officer who is doing his or her job on a routine stop.

    Personally, I appreciate the fine law enforcement officers who lay their lives on the line every day to protect and serve the rest of us.

  12. #12
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post

    The gun on my belt is no different than the cell phone on the other side of my belt.
    Surely you jest.

  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 Woody1960
    if the police dont check id whats to stop a bad guy from carring just like the OC'er is?
    I would rather just show him id and be on my way, then have 5 cars show up and really waste tax dollars.
    If you want to give up your 4A right protecting you against unwarranted searches, you may.
    Understand that's what you're doing; do it knowingly, not because it's convenient.

    But by doing so you reinforce the belief, held by WAY too many LEO, that that's what should always happen, and therefore you make it harder for those of us who choose to protect our rights.

    And if you get stopped every place you go - let's say you're running errands & go 6 places - and every time they stop you & seize your ID & run a check on you & maybe even seize your firearm & run a check on it it takes 10 minutes... they've wasted an hour of your day, plus all the police-related manpower.
    (15 minutes x 6 = 1 1/2 hours.)
    Think maybe it'd be more convenient to tell them "no" and go on with your errands?
    Or maybe it'd be a hassle the first time, because they're not used to people standing up for their rights, but after that they should leave you alone. And if they don't, they'll leave you alone after the 1983 suit.

    What's to stop a BG from OCing? They don't want attention.
    Given the "totality of circumstances" - looking shifty, dressing wrong, whatever it is that says "bad guy" to the police - OCing would give a reason for police to do a felony takedown.

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkD51
    in how many of those instances, will an LEO honestly confide, that he only stopped to question you, and asked for ID out of a personal curiosity?
    ...
    I don't think I'd be feeling very comfortable
    Most times, people who refuse to answer questions, refuse to provide ID, & consistently ask "why am I being detained?" are let go with little hassle.
    BTW, don't ask "am I being detained", ask "WHY am I being detained".

    Because that will put them on notice that you feel like you're not free to leave (the officer has made a show of force which you interpret as restraining your freedom to leave), AND s/he will probably be startled enough to reply that you're not being detained.
    At which point you say, "good day then" and walk away.

    If they stop you again, lather, rinse, repeat.

    And for your dining pleasure, I present an assortment of legal citations:

    "The Claim and exercise of a Constitutional Right cannot be converted into a crime."
    Miller v. U.S.

    "The mere presence of firearms does not create exigent circumstances."
    Wisconsin v. Kiekhefer

    "Stopping a car for no other reason than to check the license and registration was unreasonable under the 4th amendment."
    Delaware v. Prouse
    [IOW, police can't stop you unless they have RAS of a crime.]

    "Police conduct does not need to be egregious or outrageous in order to be coercive. Subtle pressures are considered to be coercive if they exceed the defendant’s ability to resist. Pressures that are not coercive in one set of circumstances may be coercive in another set of circumstances."
    Wisconsin v. Hoppe

    "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."
    St. John v. McColley [Alamogordo]

    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. Ubiles

    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.
    United States v. King

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by Woody1960 View Post
    Thanks for the replys guys. I understand OC'ers are doing nothing wrong, but if the police dont check id whats to stop a bad guy from carring just like the OC'er is? I dont mean to attach negatives to citizen doing something leagle. I guess the way I see it is, I would rather just show him id and be on my way,then have 5 cars show up and really waste tax dollars.
    Glad to have you aboard, Woody.

    You have to follow your own lights. If, based on your experience and knowledge, you believe cooperation is the way to go, don't change just because of how we do it.

    Of course, there are reasons some of us do it differently. Here is some of our reasoning. Mine, anyway.

    Under our system of government, we decided a long time ago that government can do more damage than common criminals. Read long enough and you will come across a quote by Ben Franklin to the effect that those who trade rights for safety will have neither rights nor safety. He had to pose the issue as such because...well...a more accurate statement would be to say that those who trade rights for rights will have no rights.

    You see, rights are safety. Safety from government. A common criminal affects only those people he encounters. Government affects every person within its jurisdiction. If it goes bad, it can have far worse effects on its subject population than the common criminals. Plus, arresting government is pretty difficult, since it makes the laws. So, broadly speaking, part of the price we pay for freedom is that cops don't catch all the criminals. That's the deal.

    Thus, Americans are not routinely subject to cops just walking up to us and demanding our identity, address, and business just to see if we are criminals. Nor, are we subject to random traffic stops just to see if we are criminals. Nor, are we subject to having our Sunday dinners interrupted by a monthly "criminal check" or "contraband check" of our homes.

    But, regarding guns, as another poster has implied, self-defense is a basic human right and the police have no business pretending a defensive implement somehow deserves suspicion. Such is kind of like a cop saying, "Oh! Look! That one is eating. Let's check him out, Fred. He might be loading up on carbs preparatory to a crime spree."

    So, some of us politely hold the line. No power to demand an identity document? No identity document provided. No power to hold me and make me answer questions? "Sorry, officer. I know you're probably just doing your job, but I do not consent to an encounter. I'll be on my way, now."

    There is more to the story. The videos linked below present it better than I can:

    Busted: A Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters by FlexYourRights.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqMjMPlXzdA


    Talking to Police by Prof. James Duane of Regent University Law School
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

    Ten Rules for Dealing with Police by FlexYourRights
    http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/watch...g-with-police/


    Flex You Rights website. See their FAQs, a real treasure trove of info.
    http://www.flexyourrights.com/faq

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy View Post
    Your post make perfect sense to me, Woody!

    I believe a person really has to have a big "chip on their shoulder" to purposefully infuriate a law enforcement officer who is doing his or her job on a routine stop.

    Personally, I appreciate the fine law enforcement officers who lay their lives on the line every day to protect and serve the rest of us.
    MOST people, OC or not, do NOT "purposefully infuriate a law enforcement officer." Have you seen posts indicating what action people allegedly take due to this "chip on their shoulder?"
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy View Post
    Surely you jest.
    Of course he was. The cell phone is not an enumerated right. A cell phone is not one of the very few pieces of personal property expressly mentioned in the Bill of Rights.

    You were right to question him on it. There is no way a cell phone and a gun both have the same standing or status.
    Last edited by Citizen; 07-11-2011 at 12:41 AM.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy View Post
    SNIP Personally, I appreciate the fine law enforcement officers who lay their lives on the line every day to protect and serve the rest of us.
    Me, too. I just wish they were a higher percentage of the total number of police.

    And, I wish they would do something to expel or correct the bad apples. Way, way too many bad apples.

    http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?p=4435

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy View Post
    SNIP I believe a person really has to have a big "chip on their shoulder" to purposefully infuriate a law enforcement officer who is doing his or her job on a routine stop.
    1. In case you missed it, I'm reiterating Wrightme's call for a cite to an OCer who purposely tried to infuriate a cop. As opposed to a cop who tried to provoke an OCer or other citizen during a stop--a common, perhaps standard, procedure according to former cop Dale Carson in his book Arrestproof Yourself.

    2. Where are all these routine stops of OCers? I've not come across many routine stops of OCers. Except maybe the 12031(e) checks in California, and a) none of those OCers tried to infuriate the cop, and b) haven't had any "E" checks reported lately that I recall.

    3. There is nothing routine about seizing an American citizen for doing something that is a) perfectly legal, and b) an enumerated right.

    So, where does this routine element in your post come from?

    Please link to posts. Thanking you in advance for your committment to factual posting.
    Last edited by Citizen; 07-10-2011 at 11:47 PM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member MarkD51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sheboygan Wisconsin
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    CITE!!! no OCers have been shot. You spew BJLL SHlT!!!
    and your own alamagordo courts and the appellate courts have ruled clearly,,,
    leave OCers alone, carrying a gun is lawful activity!
    look up o'hare V. alamagordo, from just last year, OCer paid 21000$ settlement by cops!!

    are you a WAVE, jeriboniva, ANTI liberal leftist, brady plant?
    try to find some creditability and facts,,, otherwise..
    GET OFF MY LAWN!!!
    I haven't addressed anyone else here, or you like some sort of a-hole, so don't address me as one sir!

    I am very well aware of the Matthew St John Case, I've lived here for 8 years, and am aware of what happens in this town, and do read the news every day.

    Oh, and wasn't there a man carrying in a Walmart not too long back (Concealed), was spotted, and dime dropped by a walmart employee, as the gun was spotted when he bent over to get something off a shelf, and was shot, and killed outside, while his girlfreind, and other witnesses looked on? That he never drew his gun, as police officers claimed?

    Trust me when I tell you, there's a lot of young "barney fife" cops in this town, still wet behind the ears, who are very eager to try to impress their superiors, and are NOT experienced enough to know laws, nor have the years of experience of how to properly interact with the public.

    As for your other accusations you threw at me, which all are totally false, you can go pound sand up your ass sir!

    Maybe had you called me a bit paranoid, yes, maybe I am, as I am very apprehensive, and afraid of the law enforcement present in this town.
    Last edited by MarkD51; 07-11-2011 at 12:29 AM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkD51 View Post
    I haven't addressed anyone else here, or you like some sort of a-hole, so don't address me as one sir!

    I am very well aware of the Matthew St John Case, I've lived here for 8 years, and am aware of what happens in this town, and do read the news every day.

    Oh, and wasn't there a man carrying in a Walmart not too long back (Concealed), was spotted, and dime dropped by a walmart employee, as the gun was spotted when he bent over to get something off a shelf, and was shot, and killed outside, while his girlfreind, and other witnesses looked on? That he never drew his gun, as police officers claimed?Trust me when I tell you, there's a lot of young "barney fife" cops in this town, still wet behind the ears, who are very eager to try to impress their superiors, and are NOT experienced enough to know laws, nor have the years of experience of how to properly interact with the public.

    As for your other accusations you threw at me, which all are totally false, you can go pound sand up your ass sir!

    Maybe had you called me a bit paranoid, yes, maybe I am, as I am very apprehensive, and afraid of the law enforcement present in this town.
    That sounds like CostCo, Vegas. Not Walmart in NM.


    http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/gunst...ce%20Order.pdf

    Matthew St John was unreasonably seized.

    Reading that document, the theater owner used LE as if they were private security to remove someone he did not want in the theater.
    Last edited by wrightme; 07-11-2011 at 12:36 AM.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  21. #21
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by MilProGuy
    I believe a person really has to have a big "chip on their shoulder" to purposefully infuriate a law enforcement officer who is doing his or her job on a routine stop.
    Personally, I appreciate the fine law enforcement officers who lay their lives on the line every day to protect and serve the rest of us.
    Not this troll again...
    Asserting your rights & expecting an officer to honor the oath s/he took is not "having a chip on your shoulder".

    If the officer were really doing his job, he would see that there's no crime being committed & not even stop the citizen.

    If he is "infuriated" by someone expecting him to respect the rights of citizens, keep his oath, uphold the law & the Constitution, etc., he needs a different job.
    How'd he get past the psych screening?

    And there are jobs in the US which are much more dangerous than being a LEO.
    Sometimes LEO makes the top 10. Not in 2009. (2010 isn't available yet.)
    According to this PDF, from the US DOL / BLS discussing the 2009 BLS job fatality reports, the 10 most dangerous jobs in the US were:
    commercial fishing (200 deaths / 100K)
    logging (61.8)
    airplane pilots (57.1)
    famers & ranchers (38.5)
    roofers (34.7)
    iron workers (30.3)
    sanitation worker (25.2)
    industrial machinist (18.5)
    truckers & drivers / sales workers / construction (all tied @ 18.3)

    Also see the chart on pg 19 here.
    Notice that #9 (9, 10, 11) is less than 10% the death rate of #1, & police still aren't on the list.
    Garbage collectors are. I couldn't even find the rate for police on the bls.gov site.

    And the "protect & serve" stuff is Hollywood.
    Even SCOTUS decided that police don't have to protect anyone who's not in custody.
    Last edited by MKEgal; 07-11-2011 at 12:38 AM.

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    To Mark and 1245A,

    OK, guys. Lets calm down now that one full exchange has occurred. We can all see how the misunderstanding arose.

    Lets keep it civil on the new guy's thread. (The informal rule is to wait until he's been here at least a week before really throwing the rotten vegetables. )
    Last edited by Citizen; 07-11-2011 at 12:44 AM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    well,,,

    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    To Mark and 1245A,

    OK, guys. Lets calm down now that one full exchange has occurred. We can all see how the misunderstanding arose.

    Lets keep it civil on the new guy's thread. (The informal rule is to wait until he's been here at least a week before really throwing the rotten vegetables. )
    thank you citizen,, i apologize to markd51, i was rude , curt, and short to you, i am sorry..
    many of my learned friends have responded to your views about, cop jobs, citizen rights, and
    the importance of holding your 4th and 5th amendment rights to the highest degree, and i thank them for saying ALL the things that i would have said.
    like mkegirl said, if you let the cops have your ID everytime they see YOU, they will learn that they can do that to you everytime they see you, and they will learn that they can do that to every OCer they see, everytime they see an OCer, and the more OCers that give in to the ID demand, the harder they will demand ID from EVERY OCer they see, EVERYTIME they see an OCer!!!

    the best OC, cop interaction ive ever read about was, the cop sees the OCer, he asks, can I see your ID please? the OCer says, no you may not! the cop says, OK, have a nice day!
    THAT is how it is supposed to work!
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  24. #24
    Regular Member MarkD51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sheboygan Wisconsin
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    To Mark and 1245A,

    OK, guys. Lets calm down now that one full exchange has occurred. We can all see how the misunderstanding arose.

    Lets keep it civil on the new guy's thread. (The informal rule is to wait until he's been here at least a week before really throwing the rotten vegetables. )
    I am sorry for such a retaliatory outburst, but I don't take too kindly at all to being labeled as such as 1245A wrote.

  25. #25
    Regular Member MarkD51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sheboygan Wisconsin
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by wrightme View Post
    That sounds like CostCo, Vegas. Not Walmart in NM.


    http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/gunst...ce%20Order.pdf

    Matthew St John was unreasonably seized.

    Reading that document, the theater owner used LE as if they were private security to remove someone he did not want in the theater.
    I believe in the Mr St John incident, it all stemmed back to one other movie goer wigging out, and dropped a dime on Mr. St John. That this sparked the entire chain of events that occured. Trust when I say that there is a good abundance of very strange-odd people who live here.

    I've never patronized the Aviator 10 Theater here, and probably never will. One reason I won't ever go, is the Theater appears to have become nothing more than a haven for car burglars.
    Last edited by MarkD51; 07-11-2011 at 01:54 AM.

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
  •