Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 38

Thread: LEO's "Advice" (BUACHOOO!!!)

  1. #1
    Regular Member RebelWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Grand Junction, Colorado, United States
    Posts
    41

    LEO's "Advice" (BUACHOOO!!!)

    BUAAAAACHOOO!!! I'm allergic to my own topic! That was a sneeze, for those who don't get my humor.

    I had a lengthy conversation tonight with my college professor. He is "really into guns," but as he told me tonight, refuses to carry one after talking to a local "LEO Friend" of his. This Leo told him that carrying a gun has a lot of liabilities, and could land you in jail, just for carrying.

    This LEO believes that if you should: 1) draw your weapon to show a friend (STUPID to do anyway), in public, that it could land you in jail. 2) If you defend yourself, and the perp lives, you now belong to him (the perp), because he will sue you for everything (even if he was going to kill you). 3) A cop can stop you, and ticket you for openly carrying a gun (even the professor know otherwise). 4) If you shoot someone, in defense of another, you could land in jail, or have "legal problems for 10 years," while the Gov.. takes away your right to carry a gun. 5) It's not "necessary" to carry a gun with all the "professionals" around.

    BUAAAAAACCCHHHOOOO!!!!

    Sniff....

    Big flaw in Logic....

    Sniff....

    Well I think my allergies are clearing up a bit. Hope ya'll like the post!

    RebelWolf

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nampa, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,096
    Sounds like a "professional" victim! Have you suggested that he register and become familiar with his rights and common sense thru this forum?

  3. #3
    Regular Member Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    East of Aurora, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    672
    Cops lie. I don't understand why people ask them questions. If they don't know the answer they'll make it up. If they do know the answer they'll tell you what they want the answer to be.
    Colorado Gun Owners - COGO
    http://www.ColoradoGunOwners.com

    A discussion forum for Colorado Gun Owners.

    Colorado Firearm law.
    http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/colorado/
    Lexis Nexis: Colorado law pertaining to firearms.
    Title 18, Article 12

  4. #4
    Regular Member RebelWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Grand Junction, Colorado, United States
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by carracer View Post
    Sounds like a "professional" victim! Have you suggested that he register and become familiar with his rights and common sense thru this forum?
    I have told him about the site. But this was geared more toward the following:

    Quote Originally Posted by Beau View Post
    Cops lie. I don't understand why people ask them questions. If they don't know the answer they'll make it up. If they do know the answer they'll tell you what they want the answer to be.
    ^^^^Which is why I posted this in the first place.

  5. #5
    Regular Member JamesB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lakewood, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by RebelWolf View Post
    ...I had a lengthy conversation tonight with my college professor. He is "really into guns," but as he told me tonight, refuses to carry one after talking to a local "LEO Friend" of his. This Leo told him that carrying a gun has a lot of liabilities, and could land you in jail, just for carrying.

    This LEO believes that if you should: 1) draw your weapon to show a friend (STUPID to do anyway), in public, that it could land you in jail. 2) If you defend yourself, and the perp lives, you now belong to him (the perp), because he will sue you for everything (even if he was going to kill you). 3) A cop can stop you, and ticket you for openly carrying a gun (even the professor know otherwise). 4) If you shoot someone, in defense of another, you could land in jail, or have "legal problems for 10 years," while the Gov.. takes away your right to carry a gun. 5) It's not "necessary" to carry a gun with all the "professionals" around.

    Big flaw in Logic....

    RebelWolf
    I think I would have another long conversation with the professor. There is a BIG flaw in the logic. If the prof. knows the LEO was dead wrong about the question of OC, does that not make grounds to question the rest of the statement?

  6. #6
    Regular Member RebelWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Grand Junction, Colorado, United States
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesB View Post
    I think I would have another long conversation with the professor. There is a BIG flaw in the logic. If the prof. knows the LEO was dead wrong about the question of OC, does that not make grounds to question the rest of the statement?
    This wasn't about OC in particular, it was about ANY Carry period. The professor is a very nice guy, and I respect him a great deal. It's the LEO's misinformation that I was referring to. And while I agree that another conversation would be nice, it may not be "fruitful" when someone has already made up their mind on what is, or is not ok. I just hope that others learn that LEO's aren't the best people for legal advice, and are usually biassed toward Govt. control.

    Peace,

    RebelWolf

  7. #7
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    What the LEO is doing is not lying. It's called 'central tendency' in psychology.

    He's seen a lot of actions, outcomes, events surrounding firearm use and without using a filter for those which don't apply, he's remembering (perhaps even embellishing) the worst of the worst and trying to be 'fair' (though dissuasive of carry), he thinks he's protecting the civilian from these hazards.

    They're real in the LEO's mind. He has no civilian perspective so he can't evince one. It's really black and white to him, given that he's never thought about firearm carry from any other point of view.
    A gun in a holster is better than one drawn and dispensing bullets. Concealed forces the latter. - ixtow

    Hi, I'm hypercritical. But I mean no harm, I just like to try to look deeply at life

  8. #8
    Regular Member Polynikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post
    Everything this LEO said is true, but the same applies to any LEO who carries a gun. They "could" be exposed to the same risks. It's is not very likely, but it "could" happen. Carrying a gun is serious business and should not be undertaken without knowing the risks and accepting them. If you are not comfortable with the risks you should leave your gun at home. Of course, there are risks involved it that course of action, too. Life is full of risks, they are unavoidable.
    Actually, the LEO was quite wrong on most counts.

    1. There's no law specifically referring to brandishing in CO. The relevant charges would probably be more along the lines of menacing or disorderly conduct depending on how the cops were notified.
    2. CO has a Civil Immunity Clause, meaning if you use lethal force and your self-defense is legally justified, no one can take you to civil court for damages.
    3. OC is perfectly legal in the state of CO, and the open carry of a firearm is not sufficient reason for detaining a citizen. This standard is upheld in the highest courts.
    4. This one is a big "Maybe." Could something like this happen if it wasn't a clear cut case of defense. Sure, it could, but it's highly unlikely.
    5. Pshh... I don't think this one really needs addressing, especially with stories like these in the news. Remember, when seconds count, the "professionals" are just minutes away.
    "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it." - Judge Learned Hand

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    What the LEO is doing is not lying. It's called 'central tendency' in psychology.

    He's seen a lot of actions, outcomes, events surrounding firearm use and without using a filter for those which don't apply, he's remembering (perhaps even embellishing) the worst of the worst and trying to be 'fair' (though dissuasive of carry), he thinks he's protecting the civilian from these hazards.

    They're real in the LEO's mind. He has no civilian perspective so he can't evince one. It's really black and white to him, given that he's never thought about firearm carry from any other point of view.
    You bring up some good points, Badger. Your average LEO isn't without any civilian reference, however. All of them have at least 18 years before they joined the force, and most city police departments require a 4-year degree, so you're looking at another 4 years as an adult, albeit in the protective, nearly ubiquitous anti-gun mentality on campus. On top of that, while some police departments have a maximum age (usually 35), some do not, and so accept adults from all walks of life. An acquaintance of mine joined the local department after retiring from the military. He was 44 when he joined.

    Still, if an LEO's first real exposure to firearms was at the academy, I think it's likely they'll be viewing a handgun as a "police law-enforcement tool," rather than as most pro-gun Americans view them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynikes View Post
    2. CO has a Civil Immunity Clause, meaning if you use lethal force and your self-defense is legally justified, no one can take you to civil court for damages.
    This did not appear to stop the recent lawsuit against the owners of an automobile-related business, one of whom shot and killed a fleeing/hiding burglar. The family sued and was awarded over $300k, despite the fact the AG refused to press any criminal charges.

    Should this never have gone to civil trial?
    Last edited by since9; 10-08-2011 at 01:11 AM.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    East of Aurora, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    672
    I didn't think Colorado had a civil immunity clause . Cite please
    Colorado Gun Owners - COGO
    http://www.ColoradoGunOwners.com

    A discussion forum for Colorado Gun Owners.

    Colorado Firearm law.
    http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/colorado/
    Lexis Nexis: Colorado law pertaining to firearms.
    Title 18, Article 12

  11. #11
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    You bring up some good points, Badger.
    Though one might be tempted to say the LEO is lying, lame, or whatever, it's important to note that people don't consider themselves 'bad', or evil, they justify.

    To try to understand an attitude, the way is to seek out root causes. My root cause analysis is that the guy just hadn't considered a different POV because he identifies the firearm as a LEO enforcement and abatement tool.

    When a LEO gets MAD, or tweaked, they sometimes go to their inner child and demonstrate behavior that even THEY are not really proud of when they calm down. The key is to be empowered by above, and to resist and learn how NOT to go to the inner child and take frustrations out on civilians.

    It's up to us to defuse and to try and keep it professional and not send the LEO stopping you to their 'bad place'. We carry the burden of calm, iow. Sometimes it works.

    $.02
    Last edited by Badger Johnson; 10-08-2011 at 09:43 AM.
    A gun in a holster is better than one drawn and dispensing bullets. Concealed forces the latter. - ixtow

    Hi, I'm hypercritical. But I mean no harm, I just like to try to look deeply at life

  12. #12
    Regular Member Half Live's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by Beau View Post
    I didn't think Colorado had a civil immunity clause . Cite please
    I believe this is what you want.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Half Live View Post
    I believe this is what you want.
    According to this, it appears the "physical force was reasonable and appropriate to prevent injury to himself or herself or to others" clause rules. Apparently, the actions of the garage owners who chased down, shot, and killed the armed intruder-robber were beyond "reasonable and appropriate."
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  14. #14
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    There are many hypothetical scenarios that could result in harrassment, arrest, etc. when it comes to the open or concealed carry of a handgun, but...in the end, what "carry" is all about is personal defense and the right we have to keep and bear arms.

    I hope I'm never in a situation to pull my handgun in self defense, much less use it, but I'd rather have it on my person and take the risk of the abovementioned scenarios than to leave it at home and be attacked while out in public (or in my own home, for that matter).

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Beau View Post
    Cops lie.
    .

  16. #16
    Regular Member DocWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,968
    I personally like the line "there is no reason to carry with the professionals around". This is great the guys at the quary in California will be glad to hear that they are safe since the professionals will protect them. Wait they are dead they can't hear us tell them that.....this is a sarcastic remark aimed at this cop.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Asking a cop about constitutional law is like asking the garbage man about theoretical physics. Actually, I'd listen to the garbage man's answer with more credulity.
    "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

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Englewood, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    654

    I believe....

    I believe anything and everything when a police officer says.... This COULD happen to you....

    Because what ever they say to you with out your lawyer present is TRUE.... It could happen to you..

    Now what will hold up in court is a horse of a different color.

  19. #19
    Regular Member rushcreek2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs. CO
    Posts
    924
    In Colorado - " The right of NO PERSON to keep & bear arms in defense of their home, person, or property shall be called into question............."

    All Colorado LEO's have sworn an oath to uphold that (constitutionally enforced ) principle.

    Badge-bearers have a dangerous, and necessary job confronting them. Somehow, someway they have to adapt to the concept that CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR is the focus of their duties.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    It's up to us to defuse and to try and keep it professional and not send the LEO stopping you to their 'bad place'. We carry the burden of calm, iow. Sometimes it works.
    Might have a t-shirt made up: The Burden of Calm.

    Nah.

    Your point is valid, though. Pushing buttons isn't good behavior in any situation involving other human beings.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    Quote Originally Posted by rushcreek2 View Post
    In Colorado - " The right of NO PERSON to keep & bear arms in defense of their home, person, or property shall be called into question............."

    All Colorado LEO's have sworn an oath to uphold that (constitutionally enforced ) principle.

    Badge-bearers have a dangerous, and necessary job confronting them. Somehow, someway they have to adapt to the concept that CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR is the focus of their duties.
    YET, I BELIEVE they get absolutely NO TRAINING as to how to accomplish their job while abiding by this amendment/edict. Why not???

    It should be simple. Get dispatch to ask pertinent questions - 'is this person doing anything (blah-blah dangerous, fattening, etc.)?' If not, 'sorry ma'am, it's legal here'.

    Show pic of a dude walking dog, shopping, and say "DO NOT hassle this law-abiding person". Show picture of Ninja with scary weapon under coat - 'if you pay attention to granpa walking dog you'll miss NINJA with BOMB, no?'.

    Anyway, it's a mockery of a travesty --Mod edited--
    A gun in a holster is better than one drawn and dispensing bullets. Concealed forces the latter. - ixtow

    Hi, I'm hypercritical. But I mean no harm, I just like to try to look deeply at life

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    It should be simple. Get dispatch to ask pertinent questions - 'is this person doing anything (blah-blah dangerous, fattening, etc.)?' If not, 'sorry ma'am, it's legal here'.
    It should be as simple as "how is he carrying his firearm?" If the answer is "it's in his holster..."
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran Verd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Lampe, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    381
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    It should be as simple as "how is he carrying his firearm?" If the answer is "it's in his holster..."
    +1

    This is exactly how it should go. If the gun is secure in the holster, there is no need to waste any more tax-payers money on something that is legal.
    One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them. Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796.
    If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. - Dalai Lama (Seattle Times, 05-15-2001).
    Find businesses that are pro gun and those that aren't. Support Friend or Foe by using it!

  24. #24
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    It should be as simple as "how is he carrying his firearm?" If the answer is "it's in his holster..."
    Is a holster required by CO law or constitution? How about OC in the hand. Although, I am not advocating OC in the hand or "mexican" carry, the point is that unless one is breaking the LAW then no confrontation is necessary.

  25. #25
    Regular Member MilProGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    1,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingfish View Post
    Is a holster required by CO law or constitution? How about OC in the hand. Although, I am not advocating OC in the hand or "mexican" carry, the point is that unless one is breaking the LAW then no confrontation is necessary.
    No, I wouldn't recommend carrying a handgun around in your hand while out in public, either. A person who would do so is just "cruisin' for a bruisin'"!
    Proud Veteran ~ U.S. Army / Army Reserve

    Mississippi State Guard ~ Honorably Retired


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
  •