• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Cop mistakes Camary for police SUV?

HandyHamlet

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
2,772
Location
Terra, Sol
This does not pass the sniff test.


Atlanta cop allegedly draws gun, mistakes car for police SUV

By Marcus K. Garner

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

A Covington man says he was mistakenly stopped at gunpoint Friday by an Atlanta Police sergeant.

...The policeman apparently mistook the sedan the man was driving for a police SUV parked nearby, Rashid McCall told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

...Sgt. James Ebb’s white Ford Explorer, embossed with Atlanta Police decals, was parked some 15 feet away from where McCall got into his white Toyota Camry before the incident.

http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/atlanta-cop-allegedly-draws-1187677.html
 

thebigsd

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
3,535
Location
Quarryville, PA
And the guy works for a law firm...I smell a big lawsuit coming...

That officer should be fired outright.
 
Last edited:

Aknazer

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
1,760
Location
California
And the guy works for a law firm...I smell a big lawsuit coming...

That officer should be fired outright.

It's better than that. He's part of a law firm that had already sued the cops for shooting someone in the face! And the person that was just threatened had worked on the case and directly with the person that was shot in the face.
 
Last edited:

xd shooter

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
333
Location
usa
White Toyota Camry

JT2BG22K710582820_1.jpg


White Atlanta PD Ford Explorer

2096384953_119a3de686.jpg


Yeah, I can see that..lol

Imagine for a moment, if an Open Carrier had made the same mistake...:(
 

Glock9mmOldStyle

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
2,038
Location
Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan, USA
Wow!

How in the heck do you mix up a white citizens car for a white SUV that is marked POLICE? I'm glad this nut is over a thousand miles away from my loved ones. There is something very wrong when this kind of thing happens. :mad: :banghead:
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Has anyone else noticed that the off-duty cop who pulled his gun in the USPS parking lot was off-duty? Driving a marked vehicle at 7:30 AM while not in uniform? A Sargeant taking/picking up mail - while not in uniform? These are not indicators of on-duty activity.

Even off-duty cops do not get a free pass to bring firearms onto USPS property:

US Code Title 18
§ 930. Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities

(a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.
(b) Whoever, with intent that a firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the commission of a crime, knowingly possesses or causes to be present such firearm or dangerous weapon in a Federal facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(c) A person who kills any person in the course of a violation of subsection (a) or (b), or in the course of an attack on a Federal facility involving the use of a firearm or other dangerous weapon, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be punished as provided in sections 1111, 1112, 1113, and 1117.
(d)Subsection (a) shall not apply to— (1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law; or
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.
Title 39 CFR 232.1
(l) Weapons and explosives . Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, no person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.

(p) Penalties and other law. (1) Alleged violations of these rules and regulations are heard, and the penalties prescribed herein are imposed, either in a Federal district court or by a Federal magistrate in accordance with applicable court rules. Questions regarding such rules should be directed to the regional counsel for the region involved.
(2) Whoever shall be found guilty of violating the rules and regulations in this section while on property under the charge and control of the Postal Service is subject to fine of not more than $50 or imprisonment of not more than 30 days, or both. Nothing contained in these rules and regulations shall be construed to abrogate any other Federal laws or regulations of any State and local laws and regulations applicable to any area in which the property is situated.

q) Enforcement. (1) Members of the U.S. Postal Service security force shall exercise the powers provided by 18 U.S.C. 3061(c)(2) and shall be responsible for enforcing the regulations in this section in a manner that will protect Postal Service property and persons thereon ....

Hope the Sergeant finds himself facing a long and difficult time explaining his behavior both to his administration and to the courts.

stay safe.
 

Ca Patriot

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
2,330
Location
, ,
Skidmark - Are you saying its illegal for an off duty police officer to carry his firearm at the post office ?
 

lockman

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
1,193
Location
Elgin, Illinois, USA
Under federal law there would be no exemption for off duty police engaged in private or personal business.
 
Last edited:

xd shooter

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
333
Location
usa
Skidmark isn't saying it, the LAW is saying it.

(d)Subsection (a) shall not apply to— (1) the lawful performance of official duties who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law


Weapons and explosives . Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, no person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes
 

RetiredOC

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
1,561
Has anyone else noticed that the off-duty cop who pulled his gun in the USPS parking lot was off-duty? Driving a marked vehicle at 7:30 AM while not in uniform? A Sargeant taking/picking up mail - while not in uniform? These are not indicators of on-duty activity.

Well, the police get to claim ignorance to the law. Had that been a regular joe shmoe citizen he'd be wearing silver bracelets.
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

Self-defense is a lawful purpose.


Yep that is right BUT your UNATTRIBUTED quote is from federal 930 NOT the Postal regulation in Federal law under chapter 39 (I believe) where there is NO Lawful purpose exclusion rather "OFFICIAL PURPOSES!"
 

thebigsd

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
3,535
Location
Quarryville, PA
The more I think about this story the more pissed off I get. Why was this officer not arrested on the spot? How can you make an argument that those two cars are in any way similar. The offense is so egregious. Stories like this are why I no longer have faith in the police. I am willing to bet no criminal charges will be brought...ridiculous.
 
Last edited:

okboomer

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
1,164
Location
Oklahoma, USA
Sounds to me like a perfect situation to exercise Citizen's Arrest powers ... Georgia have that in the state constitution?
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Skidmark - Are you saying its illegal for an off duty police officer to carry his firearm at the post office ?

Two days late with a response. Sorry about that.

As has been mentioned by others, it is what the law says - no exemption for off-duty cops on not-official business.

And really what I'm pointing out is that there is a tendency amongst all sectors of society to want to give free passes to cops for just about everything they do. Of course there are some cops who also desire/insist on the free passes.

But how, skidmark, you ask, can we ever tell if a cop is off-duty? Don't cop departments tell us that no matter where they are or what they are doing they are cops and thus entitled to enforce the law? Well, I have a simple answer for you. Pose this question to your state's Worker's Comp board: In this [use the OP's scenario for grins and giggles] if the non-cop punched the cop and broke the cop's jaw, would the cop be covered by Worker's Comp for the injury sustained? If the answer is "No" then the cop was not on duty. If the answer is "Yes" then the taxpayers in your state are getting ripped off. I've got a standing wager of one beverage of your choice against one beverage of my choice that the answer will be "No". Submit the written opinion saying I am wrong and the drink is on me.

stay safe.
 
Top