Can my firearm be removed in this scenario?

Doubting Thomas · Oct 25, 2011

I am an open-carry advocate in North Carolina. I was downtown with my girlfriend, and a brawl broke out across the street at the bar. In the event that anyone involved had a weapon, I walked over with my revolver secured openly on my hip, where it remained as I tried to sense-talk and mediate. When police arrived, the men who were fighting were led off to the side for questioning, but an officer noticed my revolver and asked what my involvement was. I informed him that I was a sober bystander who knew no one involved in the fight, and merely wished to do my civic duty in the event of an escalation of force. He told me that he was going to remove my firearm and put it in his trunk while he asked me some questions. I said, "With all due respect, I'd rather retain my property, thank you." His reply was, "You can 'rather' all you want, but I'm taking this until we get this all settled and worked out." Not knowing whether the law was on my side past this point, I conceded. Eventually, my revolver was handed back to me, separate from my ammunition, and I was told "not to reload until you're at least about a block from here."

I stealthily recorded the entire exchange (paranoid as I am from O.C. harassment in the past ~_^). Does an officer in this situation have higher authority than usual, due to the volatile nature of the situation? I realize that this isn't just a few questions while I was minding my own business, but rather an active interference in a conflict. I realize that he doesn't know who I am, my involvement to anyone present, or my intentions, and I don't wish to make his job difficult. However, at the same time, I don't wish to compromise my own rights, and so I'd like to know if anyone knows what their protocol is, in this case.

JoeSparky · Oct 25, 2011

Since you admitted to being there just in case (I know these were not your words. ) He probably has RAS that you may have been involved. Once the witness clarified that you were not an actor in the brawl, you were given your firearm back along with the unlawful order to not rearm.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

mattwestm · Oct 25, 2011

This is why it's always better to walk the other way unless someone's life is in danger. You put yourself in a situation that could have gotten a lot worse. The officer took your gun because he didn't know whether you were involved in the fight or not.

Would you have gotten involved if you were unarmed?

Doubting Thomas · Oct 25, 2011

mattwestm said:
This is why it's always better to walk the other way unless someone's life is in danger. You put yourself in a situation that could have gotten a lot worse. The officer took your gun because he didn't know whether you were involved in the fight or not.

Would you have gotten involved if you were unarmed?

I like to think that I would have. I like to think that if a deadly weapon had been part of the equation, that I couldn't bear knowing that there might have been anything I could have done about it, but did not. Of course, I didn't need to think down that path at the time, because I was afforded the additional confidence which comes with having a .357 within arm's reach. If the trial fire ever got hot enough, I suppose we'd see. May that day never come, and may reason prevail, I can only hope.

Doubting Thomas · Oct 25, 2011

JoeSparky said:
Since you admitted to being there just in case (I know these were not your words. ) He probably has RAS that you may have been involved. Once the witness clarified that you were not an actor in the brawl, you were given your firearm back along with the unlawful order to not rearm.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

Precisely. I decided to insert myself into the equation, "Just in case." Two guys were brawling, and I'd forgotten to mention that a few girls were beating on another girl, and also that the girl/guy fight crossed over into each other a couple of times. Groups were forming on the outskirts (people addicted to pandemonium), and the usual 'mob mentality' was in its incipient stages. I stayed focused on the men, because they tend to be the most combustible (not that I needed to tell you that).

I guess you're right. I would place myself under potential suspicion the moment I was interacting with them (guilty by association, so far as the police pulling up are concerned). At least now, I have something to reflect on for future reference. I'll keep doing my research, as well. Thanks.

Fallschirjmäger · Oct 25, 2011

"Gee, sorry, Officer Friendly, but I have this little rule that goes like this -
Unless I'm under arrest or being detained then I'm going to be at least as well armed as anyone I'm having a voluntary encounter with.
Now, since I believe in letting people have as much authority as they can handle, I'll let you make the decision:
Do I get my firearm back and continue on my merry way, or
Do I get my firearm back and we continue to have a conversation?"

If Officer Friendly is disinclined to treat me as an innocent citizen, then I'm disinclined to speak with him on the subject. I'll either speak with someone else, or not at all.

hazek · Oct 25, 2011

I'm a bit concerned with your course of action. You inserted yourself into a brawl that you didn't see how it started, you had no idea about who was the original aggressor or who defended themselves and I'm especially concerned by this part of your story:

Doubting Thomas said:
In the event that anyone involved had a weapon,

Let's say one of them pulls out a gun and you draw and shoot. What if it turns out the person who drew initially was a victim of the assault and decided to finally draw a weapon to fend of multiple attackers?

Or say the fight escalates and a mob of aggressors form, one of them notices you and gets his friends to try and jump you and take away your weapon which now forces you to draw upon several people that otherwise wouldn't need to be drawn upon?

Chief1297 · Oct 25, 2011

hazek said:
I'm a bit concerned with your course of action.

Agreed 100%. Then complained when a PO relieves you of your weapon???

Gunslinger · Oct 25, 2011

The BS catch-all "Officer safety" would apply. You were material to the incident and he wanted to question you. His removal of your firearm was lawful, so long as it was returned to you after the incident was cleared. You involved yourself in the incident--rightly or wrongly, so have to expect something like this--or worse, was going to happen.

Badger Johnson · Oct 25, 2011

Doubting Thomas said:
Precisely. I decided to insert myself into the equation, "Just in case."

Pardon my bluntness, but anyone who does this is a moron and is just asking for trouble. Glad you didn't get put into 'the system' as a result of your foolishness.

Doubting Thomas · Oct 25, 2011

hazek said:
Let's say one of them pulls out a gun and you draw and shoot. What if it turns out the person who drew initially was a victim of the assault and decided to finally draw a weapon to fend of multiple attackers?

Or say the fight escalates and a mob of aggressors form, one of them notices you and gets his friends to try and jump you and take away your weapon which now forces you to draw upon several people that otherwise wouldn't need to be drawn upon?

To the best of my knowledge, if I am armed, and 10 unarmed men decide to assault me with fists, I am not allowed even to draw my weapon by law, because no one has escalated deadly force. From what I gather from when I took my concealed carry course (still waiting on the paperwork), if someone were hitting me bare-handed, it is my obligation to flee, for the purposes of weapon retention. Until an aggressor drew a deadly weapon, a defendant who draws his own in anticipation (the person you describe above) has legally just made themselves the aggressor. ~_^

Regarding the idea of people trying to take away my revolver, I carry a mini-Maglite on my belt as well, which doubles handily as a melee weapon. If they have only fists, I'm not sure they want to be jabbed in any sensitive areas with it.

I was seated across the street and saw the fight formulate. I don't know who said what to who, but I know it began solely with words. When multiple people begin flailing on a woman, which in turn spurs a separate fight, I couldn't imagine learning later that an unarmed person was stabbed/shot by a person who escalated deadly force, if I could have done anything to mitigate that. At any rate, and everyone's constructive criticism is welcome regardless, the topic at hand was not "Were my actions the best course of actions," but rather, "Are my carry rights compromised by intervening?"

Doubting Thomas · Oct 25, 2011

Badger Johnson said:
Pardon my bluntness, but anyone who does this is a moron and is just asking for trouble...

I suppose I should have made it clear that, while I like to avoid personal complications, that my potentially getting "into trouble" is something I value less than helping someone who is "already in" trouble.

razor_baghdad · Oct 25, 2011

Badger Johnson said:
Pardon my bluntness, but anyone who does this is a moron and is just asking for trouble. Glad you didn't get put into 'the system' as a result of your foolishness.

Not sorry for my bluntness, but the smiley at the end of your quote is patronizing at best, so I deleted it. How about some professional open carry tact instead of a "moronic" post. Don't mean to flame, but the OP is asking an honest question.

Doubting Thomas said:
When multiple people begin flailing on a woman, which in turn spurs a separate fight, I couldn't imagine learning later that an unarmed person was stabbed/shot by a person who escalated deadly force, if I could have done anything to mitigate that. At any rate, and everyone's constructive criticism is welcome regardless, the topic at hand was not "Were my actions the best course of actions," but rather, "Are my carry rights compromised by intervening?"

IMHO, the OP was justified in his actions, the LEO's did what they thought was right, and the OP went home.

When men begin flailing on a woman, IMHO, the "Duty to retreat" law becomes ambiguous. "Women" are in a totally different category when it comes to self-defense/fear for life. Multiple men beating on a women, IMHO, would fall into that category and would be defensible in a court of law if a good samaritan came to her aid.

I, myself, would not stand by and watch a woman being beaten, whether she deserved it or not, nor whether I was armed or not. [thanks mattwestm for asking]

hazek · Oct 25, 2011

Doubting Thomas said:
To the best of my knowledge, if I am armed, and 10 unarmed men decide to assault me with fists, I am not allowed even to draw my weapon by law, because no one has escalated deadly force. From what I gather from when I took my concealed carry course (still waiting on the paperwork), if someone were hitting me bare-handed, it is my obligation to flee, for the purposes of weapon retention. Until an aggressor drew a deadly weapon, a defendant who draws his own in anticipation (the person you describe above) has legally just made themselves the aggressor. ~_^

I'm not sure you got that right:

[video=youtube;M8_0Jp9sk7M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8_0Jp9sk7M[/video]

Doubting Thomas said:
Regarding the idea of people trying to take away my revolver, I carry a mini-Maglite on my belt as well, which doubles handily as a melee weapon. If they have only fists, I'm not sure they want to be jabbed in any sensitive areas with it.

I was seated across the street and saw the fight formulate. I don't know who said what to who, but I know it began solely with words. When multiple people begin flailing on a woman, which in turn spurs a separate fight, I couldn't imagine learning later that an unarmed person was stabbed/shot by a person who escalated deadly force, if I could have done anything to mitigate that. At any rate, and everyone's constructive criticism is welcome regardless, the topic at hand was not "Were my actions the best course of actions," but rather, "Are my carry rights compromised by intervening?"

Of course you have the right to your opinion but again it might not be the most appropriate one:
[video=youtube;N_AUn87uP00]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_AUn87uP00[/video]

p.s.: I'm not in anyway shape or form capable to give a reputable legal opinion or advice, I'm just trying to figure it out myself by looking into what reputable people say on the matter and while I was at it I wanted to share their advice with you.

old curmudgeon · Oct 25, 2011

Doubting Thomas said:
I am an open-carry advocate in North Carolina. I was downtown with my girlfriend, and a brawl broke out across the street at the bar. In the event that anyone involved had a weapon, I walked over with my revolver secured openly on my hip, where it remained as I tried to sense-talk and mediate. When police arrived, the men who were fighting were led off to the side for questioning, but an officer noticed my revolver and asked what my involvement was. I informed him that I was a sober bystander who knew no one involved in the fight, and merely wished to do my civic duty in the event of an escalation of force. He told me that he was going to remove my firearm and put it in his trunk while he asked me some questions. I said, "With all due respect, I'd rather retain my property, thank you." His reply was, "You can 'rather' all you want, but I'm taking this until we get this all settled and worked out." Not knowing whether the law was on my side past this point, I conceded. Eventually, my revolver was handed back to me, separate from my ammunition, and I was told "not to reload until you're at least about a block from here."

I stealthily recorded the entire exchange (paranoid as I am from O.C. harassment in the past ~_^). Does an officer in this situation have higher authority than usual, due to the volatile nature of the situation? I realize that this isn't just a few questions while I was minding my own business, but rather an active interference in a conflict. I realize that he doesn't know who I am, my involvement to anyone present, or my intentions, and I don't wish to make his job difficult. However, at the same time, I don't wish to compromise my own rights, and so I'd like to know if anyone knows what their protocol is, in this case.

It is my suggestion that you unload your weapon and lock it in a safe and that you do not open that safe until you grow up.

Inserting yourself into a situation where you have no idea how it began nor where it will end is totally immature.

Settling bar fights is not the purpose of a CCW. Settling bar fights that are happening across the street .....

CDT COX · Oct 25, 2011

You are NOT a cop. Your weapon is for self-DEFENSE, not walking across the street to a fight to be the badass that breaks it up.

ArmySoldier22 · Oct 25, 2011

In my opinion, if it was just a couple guys going at each other, let them be. Idiots will be idiots. If it was a group of people just beating on each other, let it be.

From what I understand, there was a woman being beaten on by multiple people. This is not ok, and if this was the OPs reason for intervening, then I completely agree with it. Whether I'm carrying or not, if I see a woman being hit by a man, I'm stepping in. Take that as you will.

David

Polynikes · Oct 25, 2011

OP, your duty was to observe and be a good witness. Stand across the street and call the authorities. The responsibility of carrying a weapon means that you should be loathe to place yourself in any situation that might require you to use it. Had you done the above, you likely would not have been disarmed and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

Dreamer · Oct 25, 2011

You inserted yourself in a street brawl involving drunk bar-patrons you had no connection with.

You, sir, are a cowboy, ignorant of the law in NC, and a danger to yourself, others, and the entire gun-rights movement in NC and the USA.

I'm actually a little dismayed that you got your gun back. Some people just shouldn't carry--and your story appears to be evidence that you might very well be in that group...

Carry24/7 · Oct 25, 2011

I was going to add my two cents but after reading all of the post im sure you get the point by now.
And I'm sure I will get some @&!* for this but really why is it such an issue that if your at a place where a LEO shows up to do an investigation takes your weapon until he knows what's going on. Put yourself in his shoes. Would you want someone at the scene with a weapon and you don't know their part or how they fit in with a weapon. I have had this done before and am ok with it. It's not like they are going to keep it forever. But it is only my opinion.

Can my firearm be removed in this scenario?

New member

Centurion

mattwestm

Guest

New member

New member

Active member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

New member

New member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member