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

Thread: Ras?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Tacoma, Wa
    Posts
    49

    Ras?

    While talking with some guys today, a very valid question came up that I'd like to pass on to you all.
    I understand the requirement for a lawful detention. I'm 21 years old, but some say I look rather younge. Would suspision of a minor carrying a firearm qualify as RAS in your minds? I can hear the 911 call in my mind "There's a kid in here and he has a gun on his hip, can someone come check this out?"

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,139
    "don't be angry with me because I'm beautiful."

  3. #3
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    I know a woman who's all of 4'9 1/2 inches tall and looks like she's 14. Is there reasonable suspicion to stop her when she is seen driving a car?
    Or, hmmmm...
    A guy has an AR-15 that looks exactly like an M16 externally except it's doesn't have a tiny, barely visible from 5' away 3rd pin in the receiver. Would it be reasonable to stop him on sight?
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 09-24-2011 at 05:26 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Lord Sega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Warrenton, Oregon
    Posts
    317
    Unfortunately, I do believe this would be RAS.

    IMHO IANAL, until you look old enough you are going to get "carded", whether it's for OC (18), CC (21), or drinking (also 21).
    BUT, it should be a friendly check, and after verification... "have a nice day".

    If you are harassed after they verify you age, then there is a problem (and I would assume, a complaint).

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    This is what comes of letting police decide what is and isn't an unreasonable seizure before the courts review it or legislatures authorize it.
    Last edited by Citizen; 09-24-2011 at 07:13 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Schlepnier's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Yelm, Washington USA
    Posts
    419
    Age alone is not enough the official RAS requirment form they have to be able to fill out looks like this-

    Terry Stop and Search Checklist

    To STOP – You must have reasonable suspicion that a suspect is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime. Reasonable suspicion must be based on specific, articulable, rational facts (less than probable cause but more than a hunch). Articulable factors justifying a Terry stop (need multiple factors, at least one of which must come from the second column) include…


    r hour
    r high crime neighborhood
    r appears lost or to not be a resident of the area
    r unusual presence
    r standing on street corner
    r nervousness
    r flight-manner of movement
    r drug trafficking neighborhood
    r other
    r hand to hand movement

    (second column, wouldn't let me paste it like it appears in word)

    r eyewitness information
    r concerned citizen
    r CI information
    r co-suspect information
    r personal knowledge of suspect’s drug use
    r personal knowledge of suspect’s license suspension status
    r smell
    r suspect statement

    I like this footnote on the bottom of the page



    To QUESTION – You may demand the suspect’s name and address and an explanation of the suspect’s actions. You may detain him for a reasonable period of time to verify his answer. If he says nothing or tells you to jump in a lake, that’s your tough luck. You cannot do anything to the suspect.

    BOTTOM LINE – You must be able to articulate reasons to distinguish the suspect from someone who just may happen to be there.
    +thought for the day+
    ++victory needs no explanation, defeat allows none++

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Tacoma, Wa
    Posts
    49
    I tend to agree with Lord Sega. Though on the other hand, detention based on looks would be considered profiling. This is why I ask for others opinions

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Wobbles View Post
    I tend to agree with Lord Sega. Though on the other hand, detention based on looks would be considered profiling. This is why I ask for others opinions
    What's wrong with profiling?
    Live Free or Die!

  9. #9
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Sega View Post
    Unfortunately, I do believe this would be RAS.

    IMHO IANAL, until you look old enough you are going to get "carded", whether it's for OC (18), CC (21), or drinking (also 21).
    BUT, it should be a friendly check, and after verification... "have a nice day".

    If you are harassed after they verify you age, then there is a problem (and I would assume, a complaint).
    Quote Originally Posted by Wobbles View Post
    I tend to agree with Lord Sega. Though on the other hand, detention based on looks would be considered profiling. This is why I ask for others opinions
    You are tending to agree with an Oregano, arent they just Californian Liberals in remission?
    If you voted for Obama to prove you are not a racist...
    what will you do now to prove you are not stupid?

    "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

    "They who can who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve niether liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Tacoma, Wa
    Posts
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    What's wrong with profiling?
    In my eyes, absolutely nothing, I'm questioning the legality of it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    What's wrong with profiling?
    It is generally considered a form of discrimination,,,you know, age, race, religion, color of skin, sexual orientation and whatever else they may have added to that list lately.

    You know, that is the reason they detain teh 7 year old as a terrorist suspect on teh No-fly list because he has the same name as someone else...can't consider age////
    Last edited by hermannr; 09-24-2011 at 09:51 PM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Lord Sega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Warrenton, Oregon
    Posts
    317
    Quote Originally Posted by Schlepnier View Post
    Age alone is not enough the official RAS requirment form they have to be able to fill out looks like this-

    Terry Stop and Search Checklist

    To STOP – You must have reasonable suspicion that a suspect is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime. Reasonable suspicion must be based on specific, articulable, rational facts (less than probable cause but more than a hunch). Articulable factors justifying a Terry stop (need multiple factors, at least one of which must come from the second column) include…

    ...

    To QUESTION – You may demand the suspect’s name and address and an explanation of the suspect’s actions. You may detain him for a reasonable period of time to verify his answer. If he says nothing or tells you to jump in a lake, that’s your tough luck. You cannot do anything to the suspect.

    BOTTOM LINE – You must be able to articulate reasons to distinguish the suspect from someone who just may happen to be there.
    I disagree, age is a factor in the crime that they have RAS for, i.e. underage carrying of a firearm. A 16 year old that is OC is committing a crime, if you are 18 1/2 years old (but look 16) and you are OC then (IMHO) they have RAS for a stop to determine your age and if over 18 that's it, free to go. Now the fun begins if you are carrying sterile (no ID on you, which is not required by law) then they could conceivably detain you until they confirm your age. This would be the same as a LEO seeing a person drinking, who while they are over the age of 21, looks under 21; detain to determine age because underage drinking is a crime.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    85

    Profiling!

    As far as profiling goes....

    We can use statistics to narrow down the cultural background of the bulk amount of terrorists. I am sorry but profiling works. The left wing cowardly portion of the U.S. will not use logic or statistics. They are the same ones who keep trying to take away our rights.

  14. #14
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522
    Grow a moustache.
    If you voted for Obama to prove you are not a racist...
    what will you do now to prove you are not stupid?

    "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

    "They who can who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve niether liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

  15. #15
    Regular Member OrangeIsTrouble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tukwila, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,398
    So let's say an 18 year old decides to take public transportation (King county bus) to go to a nice area with trails to hike and decides to OC. He/she uses an ORCA card and maybe the ORCA card used to pay for bus fare shows the age of the rider. Bus driver sees age and "knows" anyone under 21 cannot OC and calls the cops. Cops come and begin to question OCer. OCer stands the 4th and tells officer to leave him/her alone and to jump in a lake. Officer is quite annoyed and decides to take handgun away from OCer who verbally refuses and then finds ID on the OCer. OCer pledges the 5th and gets booked into KC jail.
    What happens then?
    Was the stop justified?
    The OCer did not break the law.
    Is the OCer required to explain him/herself to anyone?

    The OCer then at court with his/her lawyer explain the circumstances. Does the OCer still get charged with unlawful possession? What happens to the officer? Does he/she get charged with unlawful imprisonment?



    Interesting thoughts and questions.


    Been harassed by the police? Yelled at by the anti-gun neighbors? Mother doesn't approve?

    Then this is the place for you! Click here to get back at them!

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667
    Where in the following phrase does it say you have to even be 18 to keep(own) and bear(Open Carry) arms?

    "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

    As defined at ratification militia is defined as all able bodied male's.


    I do not believe any officer has any reason to stop any person because they are carrying a firearm in a holster on their person.
    Live Free or Die!

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Some good info so far.

    But, I believe a couple important points have been overlooked.

    During the encounter itself, it really doesn't matter what we think. Only what the cop thinks. If he thinks looking too young is RAS, he's going to seize the OCer. And, there is little the OCer can do about it besides usual cop encounter tactics. Whether it is a legal seizure or illegal seizure, one's tactics about politely refusing consent, not answering questions, etc. aren't really going to change.

    Whether a too young appearance makes for RAS is a decision for the courts. Unless a binding appellate court decision has already been made on-point or on very similar circumstances like alcohol possession, its really going to be up to the cop during the encounter, and the judge after the encounter.

    Like the poster above, I'm guessing that since age is an element of the suspected offense, appearing too young would likely be judged by a cop as RAS. And, likely supported later by a judge if it comes to it.

    In the meantime, I would get all practiced up on how to handle a police encounter.

  18. #18
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    What's wrong with profiling?
    Nothing. Especially if it involves a woman with an attractive "profile"
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  19. #19
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Some good info so far.

    But, I believe a couple important points have been overlooked.

    During the encounter itself, it really doesn't matter what we think. Only what the cop thinks. If he thinks looking too young is RAS, he's going to seize the OCer. And, there is little the OCer can do about it besides usual cop encounter tactics. Whether it is a legal seizure or illegal seizure, one's tactics about politely refusing consent, not answering questions, etc. aren't really going to change.

    Whether a too young appearance makes for RAS is a decision for the courts. Unless a binding appellate court decision has already been made on-point or on very similar circumstances like alcohol possession, its really going to be up to the cop during the encounter, and the judge after the encounter.

    Like the poster above, I'm guessing that since age is an element of the suspected offense, appearing too young would likely be judged by a cop as RAS. And, likely supported later by a judge if it comes to it.

    In the meantime, I would get all practiced up on how to handle a police encounter.
    Although that is the reality of the current system the courts might not necessarily feel the same.

    There is some legal hints in A judges words in a ruling here in Washington were the justice basically spanked the lawyer verbally for not making the proper argument about whether a 17 year old can carry or not. I can't find the link but I am sure Nick can.

    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    Where in the following phrase does it say you have to even be 18 to keep(own) and bear(Open Carry) arms?

    "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

    As defined at ratification militia is defined as all able bodied male's.


    I do not believe any officer has any reason to stop any person because they are carrying a firearm in a holster on their person.
    I believe the same 100%, but because we believe it does not change the fact that the statist want to "interpret" it differently. I am also a believer that RAS is fairly unconstitutional without a victim or proof of a crime being committed, there should be no 4th violation.

    Some other thought on the subject not directed at anyone particularly.

    "The pointof the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is notthat it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences whichreasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring thatthose inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of beingjudged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferretingout crime."
    [Terry v. Ohio, 392 US 1, 34 (1968)]
    To me this means just because an officer assumes someone looks too young does not give him RAS.
    "Uncontrolledsearch and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in thearsenal of every arbitrary government."
    [Brenninger V. U.S. 338 US 160]
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    There is some legal hints in A judges words in a ruling here in Washington were the justice basically spanked the lawyer verbally for not making the proper argument about whether a 17 year old can carry or not. I can't find the link but I am sure Nick can.
    Sieyes v Washington

    Tellingly Sieyes fails to provide convincing authority supporting an original meaning of the Second Amendment, which would grant all children an unfettered right to bear arms.   In fact during oral argument Sieyes's counsel conceded the opposite.   Furthermore Sieyes makes no adequate argument specific to the facts of this case that a 17-year-old's Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms has been violated by this statute.21  Similarly Sieyes mentions the statute restricting children from possessing firearms violates his right to bear arms under article I, section 24, but cites no authority and makes no argument for this proposition.22  Sieyes's objection may be that he was 17 years old at the time of his arrest, and his right to bear arms should be equal to that of an 18-year-old's, but his arguments fail to challenge the statutory age limit set by this statute.   In sum appellant offers no convincing authority supporting his argument that Washington's limit on childhood firearm possession violates the United States or Washington Constitutions.   Accordingly we keep our powder dry on this issue for another day.
    Live Free or Die!

  21. #21
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    Thanks Nick, now bookmarked.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    I'm not sure I see hinted support in the quoted opinion just above.

    I take the quote to mean the appellant was making a bare assertion, unsupported by law existing prior to the statute.

    Help me out here. What am I missing?
    Last edited by Citizen; 09-25-2011 at 04:47 PM.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I'm not sure I see hinted support in the quoted opinion just above.

    I take the quote to mean the appellant was making a bare assertion, unsupported by law existing prior to the statute.

    Help me out here. What am I missing?
    I have spoken with the former Justice and if the question would of been posed and supported in this case then a ruling as to age of possession, carry, car carry would of been addressed. Unfortunately Justice Sanders lost his election last year.
    Live Free or Die!

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    I have spoken with the former Justice and if the question would of been posed and supported in this case then a ruling as to age of possession, carry, car carry would of been addressed. Unfortunately Justice Sanders lost his election last year.
    I see. Thanks.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Schlepnier's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Yelm, Washington USA
    Posts
    419
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Sega View Post
    I disagree, age is a factor in the crime that they have RAS for, i.e. underage carrying of a firearm. A 16 year old that is OC is committing a crime, if you are 18 1/2 years old (but look 16) and you are OC then (IMHO) they have RAS for a stop to determine your age and if over 18 that's it, free to go. Now the fun begins if you are carrying sterile (no ID on you, which is not required by law) then they could conceivably detain you until they confirm your age. This would be the same as a LEO seeing a person drinking, who while they are over the age of 21, looks under 21; detain to determine age because underage drinking is a crime.
    I suggest you read what i posted before you reply



    Age alone is not enough. the RAS requirements require at least 2 marks off that list with one that has to come from the second column.

    Thats the law, An RAS stop has to be justifiable when the report is filed. if the LEO in this hypothetical situation pushes the issue without proper RAS requirements being met he opens himself and his department to litigation and possible criminal charges.
    +thought for the day+
    ++victory needs no explanation, defeat allows none++

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •