Hey guys, what's going on in this thread....

Wrong, Ix. Just flat-out wrong. They dont maintain any sort of database on every living soul who's been a cop, not in this State, and certainly for officers who served in a distant State 30-some-odd years ago.
Your paranoia is simply childish sometimes.

j4l said:

Wrong, Ix. Just flat-out wrong. They dont maintain any sort of database on every living soul who's been a cop, not in this State, and certainly for officers who served in a distant State 30-some-odd years ago.
Your paranoia is simply childish sometimes.

Click to expand...

Your ignornace is even worse.

I didn't say it was a database... But certain data is blanked out that they would normally get. Seen it myself when my Ex Wife worked for the SO. There was a procedure to have this done for any Employee of the SO that wanted to.

When the registration comes up as not being expired, but the name and address aren't there.... Bingo.

It helps to know what you're talking about before you call names.

To expand on ixtow's point here....the State of Florida allows certain persons to have their personal information exempt.

This heading explains better than I could... cited from the Florida Department of State Address/Identification Pubic Records Request found here...http://www.dos.state.fl.us/publications/pdf/publicrecordsexemptionrequest_formrevised.pdf

Florida law allows certain persons to request that an agency not publicly disclose their specific identification and/or location information in any of its agency records. See for example, sections 119.071 (2)(j), (4)(d) and (5)(i), 265.605, and 267.17, Fla. Stat. for applicable exemption and scope of exemption. If eligible, submit completed form to: Secretary of State, c/o Public Records Custodian Director, R.A. Gray Building, 500 S. Bronough St., Tallahassee, FL 32399. For more information, contact 850-245-6200.

Click to expand...

Of issue in this situation is statute 119.071 (2)(j) It's a HUGE section, so in the name of saving space I'll snip what I think is relevant. Found here...http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...ng=&URL=0100-0199/0119/Sections/0119.071.html

(4) AGENCY PERSONNEL INFORMATION.—

(d)1.a. The home addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers, and photographs of active or former law enforcement personnel, including correctional and correctional probation officers, personnel of the Department of Children and Family Services whose duties include the investigation of abuse, neglect, exploitation, fraud, theft, or other criminal activities, personnel of the Department of Health whose duties are to support the investigation of child abuse or neglect, and personnel of the Department of Revenue or local governments whose responsibilities include revenue collection and enforcement or child support enforcement; the home addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers, photographs, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such personnel are exempt from s. 119.07(1).

Click to expand...

Now, if you go through the entire section, you'll see that the exception is available to seemingly any person employed in public service, ie. firefighters, clerks, etc., including victims of certain crimes.

So, IMHO, ixtow is only partially correct. The absence of personal information within the database COULD mean an LEO, past or present, but, could also relate to several other professions,and, as stated, victims of crimes. But, since we know that many of those professions enjoy similar "professional courtesy" as LEOs, I'd say ixtow's point is on relatively solid ground IMHO.

A key element to bear in mind though, if I understand correctly, the information isn't automatically exempt. The person must request their private information be exempted through the above cited form.

JeepSeller said:

The person must request their private information be exempted through the above cited form.

Click to expand...

I've observed examples of people who didn't know it had been done for them. Where my Ex worked, the forms were passed around and everyone encouraged to use them. Lots of people didn't even know what it was, they thought it was just another thing they had to sign if they wanted to keep their jobs...

My point is that, when you're part of the club, your experiences don't relate to those of us who aren't. It's a disgusting double-standard, but pretending it doesn't exist is not helpful to those of use who carry the burden. That's like saying Racism doesn't exist, so you shouldn't bother fighting it... Suppression of activism by censoring/denying the problem.

My Ex's data is still obfuscated, even though she hasn't worked there for nigh on a decade. She's been pulled over drunk, speeding, with my son in the car; and they let her off. She still brags about it. Classy... Nah, no special treatment...

Clearly, it sticks with you. If you made such a request on your first day way back in the 70s, maybe you didn't even know it was mixed in with all that paperwork... It's probably still with you today. And by now, I'm sure there are notes about you in there...

Maybe someone could shed some light on the date this was created? Revisions? Any historical log about this Statute? Maybe it is just good luck For Mr. Leaving The Thread and Pouting? I'm relating my experiences. That's how it is... Doesn't prove that it applies to him. I've seen evidence that it does with others, and his experiences with LEOs in regard to OC are uncannily low-key. I'm not saying it's a proven reality, but merely that the shoe fits and there aren't many other feet it could fit.

P.S. Thank you for being the Fact Welfare on that one...

Im fully aware of the form and the exemptions, from when I was an investigator for the State some years back. -Not the point.
It's not something that's going to apply to a guy who was a cop in OHIO 30-some-odd years ago..

ixtow said:

The thick brown line strokes itself.... Do you not realize you only solidify the disdain?

The point I wanted to make was that when cops buddy up with fellow cops, the result doesn't apply to the rest of us. Citing your experiences doesn't help us because you get special treatment. You're part of the club.

We're not.

You tried to portray your situation as something the rest of us can expect. It just isn't so. I don't get to say 'Hey man, I was a cop, too.' You get special treatment when you say that, and you know it.

If you want to stay out of the thread because your deceptions will get called out, why not stop with the deceptions instead of pretending that getting called out for them is a bad thing?

If you can't help but bring your deceptions along with you, then you're right, you should stay out. If you can check them at the door, we'll get along a lot better.

Don't pass-off your experiences as something the rest of us can count on. We're not members of your club.

And, yes, LEO's plates do have special recognition when looked up. Even non-LEO State Employees do. mach1chris can confirm this... Or lie about it... Whatever... I've seen it with my own eyes.

If you cannot be honest, we'll always butt heads. Apologists taht play this slight-of-hand game will earn no quarter from me.

Click to expand...

Non-LEO not so much, but a fellow officer yes. No need to lie about anything, sir.

j4l said:

It's not something that's going to apply to a guy who was a cop in OHIO 30-some-odd years ago..

Click to expand...

Sure it is... if that former LEO from Ohio chooses to have his or her information exempt and fills out the proper form..

I quote again, and highlight the relevant portion for clarity.

(4) AGENCY PERSONNEL INFORMATION.—

(d)1.a. The home addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers, and photographs of active or former law enforcement personnel, including correctional and correctional probation officers, personnel of the Department of Children and Family Services whose duties include the investigation of abuse, neglect, exploitation, fraud, theft, or other criminal activities, personnel of the Department of Health whose duties are to support the investigation of child abuse or neglect, and personnel of the Department of Revenue or local governments whose responsibilities include revenue collection and enforcement or child support enforcement; the home addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers, photographs, and places of employment of the spouses and children of such personnel; and the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such personnel are exempt from s. 119.07(1).

Click to expand...

So, again, to (somewhat) back up the claim that an LEO can know, just by running your tag #, that you are or have been LEO, there is some truth, since, the absence of personal data on that LEO's screen CAN mean that they are dealing with an active or former LEO.

In a sense, you both are correct. While running the tag # doesn't appear to DIRECTLY inform an officer that he/she is dealing with an LEO, past or present, there can be an indirect presumption made that they are dealing with someone who has worked in public service since it would be obvious that they are dealing with someone who qualifies for the exemption according to Florida statute, and has chosen to exercise that right.

I'm not an LEO myself. I'm only speculating based on my own research into this subject as to how an LEO would interpret the data, or lack of data, they get when they run someone through the system. But, I suspect I'm not too far from the pin.

I guess citations don't matter when you've already made up your mind...

Anyway... When you're friends with the cops, and are one, too... Your experiences don't relate.

ixtow said:

This is my handout to LEOs any time I am detained and the firearm issue is involved.

Click to expand...

There, I quoted myself...