Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30

Thread: Is this standard?

  1. #1
    Regular Member 1Grizzly1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    54

    Is this standard?

    A friend of mine was getting ready to go hunting. He stopped at a Menards to get some supplies. Apparently someone saw his pistol in his door pouch and called the police. They showed up and asked for his permit and ran him for warrants. He was free to go after that. Is that SOP for police in the upper peninsula? Seemed a little excessive to me.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Near Lapeer (Hadley), Michigan, USA
    Posts
    932
    I've been to menards several times while oc'ing down here at the new store near Flint and never had a problem.

    The incident you presented is missing some details: Was the encounter consensual? or was the oc'er detained?

    It is not lawful for an officer to detain a person without reasonable suspicion of a crime. Carrying a firearm is not a crime, therefore if the person was detained simply for carrying a firearm it would appear that the officer was acting outside his lawful authority.

    However, if the officer simply asked the oc'er a few questions that were voluntarily answered it is likely that he was not being detained and no laws were broken.

    Was the oc'er carrying a recorder?
    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (who will watch the watchmen?)

    I am not a lawyer. Nothing in any of posts should be construed as legal advice.

  3. #3
    Regular Member 1Grizzly1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    54
    He wasn't OCing on purpose. He had his pistol in the door pouch of his truck. I'm sure he just complied with whatever the officer asked of him.

  4. #4
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Grizzly1 View Post
    He wasn't OCing on purpose. He had his pistol in the door pouch of his truck. I'm sure he just complied with whatever the officer asked of him.
    It was excessive and I would suggest he complain to the chief. From just the info you presented,tThe officer had RAS to check to see if he had a CPL and that was all, but not to check for warrants. Complain complain complain.....
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Refer your friend here, I'd like to hear this from him.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Venator View Post
    It was excessive and I would suggest he complain to the chief. From just the info you presented,tThe officer had RAS to check to see if he had a CPL and that was all, but not to check for warrants. Complain complain complain.....
    i would argue the RAS for a CPL on the grounds that they were there simply on the report of someone with a firearm. would they show up and ask for a drivers license simply on the report of someone driving a car? i think not.
    Last edited by smellslikemichigan; 11-03-2011 at 10:21 PM.
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

  7. #7
    Regular Member 1Grizzly1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    54
    I'm sure this is wrong, but he just informed me that in MI you HAVE to conceal after getting a permit. I'm sure this is why he let the officer run him, he thinks he has to. I will try to get the correct info to him when I have it all.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Grizzly1 View Post
    I'm sure this is wrong, but he just informed me that in MI you HAVE to conceal after getting a permit. I'm sure this is why he let the officer run him, he thinks he has to. I will try to get the correct info to him when I have it all.
    Tell your friend that after he receives his driver's license that he's Required to drive everywhere, to the mailbox, or even walking the dog.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    No, you don't have to conceal with a CPL. A CPL gives you the option not the obligation to conceal. Why would a person get a background check, fingerprints, photos, pay a fee, and such and so forth to give up a right?

  10. #10
    Regular Member 1Grizzly1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    54
    Got this from handgunlaw.us:

    Upon request, an individual licensed to carry a concealed pistol shall show both of the following to a police officer:
     His or her license to carry a concealed pistol
     His or her driver license or personal identification card
     Failure to show CCW license and Michigan driver license or Michigan personal identification card when carrying a concealed pistol is a State Civil Infraction and $100.00 fine.

    Maybe that's why he showed his license, however does that give the officer the right to run it for warrants?

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    You only have to disclose IF you are concealed carry, and IF you are being stopped.

    No right to check for warrants.
    Last edited by stainless1911; 11-03-2011 at 11:51 PM.

  12. #12
    Michigan Moderator Big Gay Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mason, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,954
    Quote Originally Posted by smellslikemichigan View Post
    i would argue the RAS for a CPL on the grounds that they were there simply on the report of someone with a firearm. would they show up and ask for a drivers license simply on the report of someone driving a car? i think not.
    However, without knowing exactly how it was called in, it is possible someone reported seeing the pistol in the door. This places it in a reachable position for the driver while he's sitting in his vehicle, and thus, he would need the CPL to be on legal grounds.

    I had police called on me, in Leslie, when someone saw me getting into my car with my pistol openly carried on my person. Once the officer was told I had a CPL, he didn't even ask to see it, he just said, "Oh, you're good to go then." and that was it.
    Big Gay Al
    Coordinator, Michigan Pink Pistols
    Big Gay Al's Big Gay (Gun) Blog
    Fabrique Nationale d'Herstal FNX-45 .45ACP 16 rounds of hurt.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Gay Al View Post
    However, without knowing exactly how it was called in, it is possible someone reported seeing the pistol in the door. This places it in a reachable position for the driver while he's sitting in his vehicle, and thus, he would need the CPL to be on legal grounds.

    I had police called on me, in Leslie, when someone saw me getting into my car with my pistol openly carried on my person. Once the officer was told I had a CPL, he didn't even ask to see it, he just said, "Oh, you're good to go then." and that was it.
    however, i still feel my analogy is valid because unless the person reported that he was brandishing the firearm, the officers had no RAS. if someone called him in for simply driving his vehicle in the parking lot (an act which also requires a license), would the police respond? let alone come out and check and run his drivers license? i think not.
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

  14. #14
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Grizzly1 View Post
    Got this from handgunlaw.us:

    Upon request, an individual licensed to carry a concealed pistol shall show both of the following to a police officer:
     His or her license to carry a concealed pistol
     His or her driver license or personal identification card
     Failure to show CCW license and Michigan driver license or Michigan personal identification card when carrying a concealed pistol is a State Civil Infraction and $100.00 fine.

    Maybe that's why he showed his license, however does that give the officer the right to run it for warrants?
    My post above stated NO.
    It was excessive and I would suggest he complain to the chief. From just the info you presented,the officer had RAS to check to see if he had a CPL and that was all, but not to check for warrants. Complain complain complain.....

    And in regards to what you posted above, that is if you are carrying concealed. In the case you presented, the man was carrying concealed in a vehicle, so the officer had RAS to ask for a CPL. ONCE HE SAW THE CPL that should have satisfied the officer that what the man was doing was legal and that should have been it.

    Running for warrants is excessive and should not be tolerated. As I said I would complain to the Chief about it.
    Last edited by Venator; 11-04-2011 at 08:49 AM.
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  15. #15
    Michigan Moderator Big Gay Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mason, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,954
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Grizzly1 View Post
    Got this from handgunlaw.us:

    Upon request, an individual licensed to carry a concealed pistol shall show both of the following to a police officer:
     His or her license to carry a concealed pistol
     His or her driver license or personal identification card
     Failure to show CCW license and Michigan driver license or Michigan personal identification card when carrying a concealed pistol is a State Civil Infraction and $100.00 fine.

    Maybe that's why he showed his license, however does that give the officer the right to run it for warrants?
    Handgunlaw.us is a decent site, but they left out a crucial part of the opening statement.

    An individual who is licensed under this act to carry a concealed pistol and who is carrying a concealed pistol shall show
    both of the following to a peace officer upon request by that peace officer:

    In other words, if you're not carrying concealed, there is no duty to disclose, nor is there any duty to show ID and CPL.
    Last edited by Big Gay Al; 11-04-2011 at 09:07 AM.
    Big Gay Al
    Coordinator, Michigan Pink Pistols
    Big Gay Al's Big Gay (Gun) Blog
    Fabrique Nationale d'Herstal FNX-45 .45ACP 16 rounds of hurt.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Grizzly1 View Post
    A friend of mine was getting ready to go hunting. He stopped at a Menards to get some supplies. Apparently someone saw his pistol in his door pouch and called the police. They showed up and asked for his permit and ran him for warrants. He was free to go after that. Is that SOP for police in the upper peninsula? Seemed a little excessive to me.
    SCOTUS ruled in Florida v. J.L. that an anonymous tip of a gun/firearm does not constitute RAS.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...9_0266_ZO.html

    Finally, the requirement that an anonymous tip bear standard indicia of reliability in order to justify a stop in no way diminishes a police officer's prerogative, in accord with Terry, to conduct a protective search of a person who has already been legitimately stopped. We speak in today's decision only of cases in which the officer's authority to make the initial stop is at issue. In that context, we hold that an anonymous tip lacking indicia of reliability of the kind contemplated in Adams and White does not justify a stop and frisk whenever and however it alleges the illegal possession of a firearm.
    Last edited by SpringerXDacp; 11-04-2011 at 10:11 AM.

  17. #17
    Regular Member 1Grizzly1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Layton, Utah, USA
    Posts
    54
    Thanks for all of the help guys. I explained things to him and referred him to this site. I don't think he was trying to just roll over and comply, I just think he didn't know any better. Education of the people is crucial.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Watch this video with your friend.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

  19. #19
    Michigan Moderator Big Gay Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mason, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,954
    Quote Originally Posted by SpringerXDacp View Post
    SCOTUS ruled in Florida v. J.L. that an anonymous tip of a gun/firearm does not constitute RAS.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...9_0266_ZO.html
    Except, we don't know that the tip was anonymous. It's possible who ever called gave their name and number.
    Big Gay Al
    Coordinator, Michigan Pink Pistols
    Big Gay Al's Big Gay (Gun) Blog
    Fabrique Nationale d'Herstal FNX-45 .45ACP 16 rounds of hurt.

  20. #20
    Regular Member HKcarrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    831
    I want to know who the busy body jerk was that called him in for "seeing it in the door.".... wth?! People are ridiculous.
    When you put the gun in the holster, put the ego in the gun safe.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Gay Al View Post
    Except, we don't know that the tip was anonymous. It's possible who ever called gave their name and number.
    I must disagree, even if the caller identified himself as Stanley T. Wojciehowicz @ 718 555-1212, it would not have established any reputation of reliability from the name alone.

    "... In the instant case, the officers' suspicion that J. L. was carrying a weapon arose not from any observations of their own but solely from a call made from an unknown location by an unknown caller. Unlike a tip from a known informant whose reputation can be assessed and who can be held responsible if her allegations turn out to be fabricated, see Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143, 146-147 (1972), "an anonymous tip alone seldom demonstrates the informant's basis of knowledge or veracity," Alabama v. White, 496 U.S., at 329. As we have recognized, however, there are situations in which an anonymous tip, suitably corroborated, exhibits "sufficient indicia of reliability to provide reasonable suspicion to make the investigatory stop." Id., at 327. The question we here confront is whether the tip pointing to J. L. had those indicia of reliability.

    In White, the police received an anonymous tip asserting that a woman was carrying cocaine and predicting that she would--
    -- leave an apartment building at a specified time,
    -- get into a car matching a particular description, and
    -- drive to a named motel. Ibid.
    Standing alone, the tip would not have justified a Terry stop. Id., at 329. Only after police observation showed that the informant had accurately predicted the woman's movements, we explained, did it become reasonable to think the tipster had inside knowledge about the suspect and therefore to credit his assertion about the cocaine. Id., at 332..."

  22. #22
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by SpringerXDacp View Post
    SCOTUS ruled in Florida v. J.L. that an anonymous tip of a gun/firearm does not constitute RAS.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...9_0266_ZO.html
    We don't know if it was anonymous or not; I would think it wasn't anonymous. Also, because I'm at work on my phone I can't post a cite right this moment but there was a SCOTUS decision that basically said a LEO can't detain for simply driving a car, absent any other apparent violation of the law. However, the SCOTUS has NOT rendered such a ruling regarding firearms in motor vehicles. Therefore, obtaining information from a source that there is a pistol in the door would most likely supply RAS, any analogy to driving notwithstanding. (Sorry smellslikemichigan)
    Last edited by DrTodd; 11-04-2011 at 02:51 PM.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  23. #23
    Michigan Moderator Big Gay Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mason, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,954
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    I must disagree, even if the caller identified himself as Stanley T. Wojciehowicz @ 718 555-1212, it would not have established any reputation of reliability from the name alone.

    "... In the instant case, the officers' suspicion that J. L. was carrying a weapon arose not from any observations of their own but solely from a call made from an unknown location by an unknown caller. Unlike a tip from a known informant whose reputation can be assessed and who can be held responsible if her allegations turn out to be fabricated, see Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143, 146-147 (1972), "an anonymous tip alone seldom demonstrates the informant's basis of knowledge or veracity," Alabama v. White, 496 U.S., at 329. As we have recognized, however, there are situations in which an anonymous tip, suitably corroborated, exhibits "sufficient indicia of reliability to provide reasonable suspicion to make the investigatory stop." Id., at 327. The question we here confront is whether the tip pointing to J. L. had those indicia of reliability.

    In White, the police received an anonymous tip asserting that a woman was carrying cocaine and predicting that she would--
    -- leave an apartment building at a specified time,
    -- get into a car matching a particular description, and
    -- drive to a named motel. Ibid.
    Standing alone, the tip would not have justified a Terry stop. Id., at 329. Only after police observation showed that the informant had accurately predicted the woman's movements, we explained, did it become reasonable to think the tipster had inside knowledge about the suspect and therefore to credit his assertion about the cocaine. Id., at 332..."
    I must also disagree. If I give my name and phone number, it's not anonymous.
    Big Gay Al
    Coordinator, Michigan Pink Pistols
    Big Gay Al's Big Gay (Gun) Blog
    Fabrique Nationale d'Herstal FNX-45 .45ACP 16 rounds of hurt.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Did I use too many words at one time or something??

    I did not say that if you gave your name and number (or even your street address, social security number and a thumb print) that it's not anonymous.

    I reported the Supreme Court's opinion that even knowing the tipster's name and telephone address was insufficient to establish a reasonable suspicion, (unless the tip is from an known informant who could be held responsible) without other supporting information. I'm going to go on the assumption that like the vast majority of the population, you're not a known criminal informant and are therefore your veracity and character are unknown. Even if Barrack Obama were to call the police and give the same report in this instance, it would be insufficient.

  25. #25
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Did I use too many words at one time or something??

    I did not say that if you gave your name and number (or even your street address, social security number and a thumb print) that it's not anonymous.

    I reported the Supreme Court's opinion that even knowing the tipster's name and telephone address was insufficient to establish a reasonable suspicion, (unless the tip is from an known informant who could be held responsible) without other supporting information. I'm going to go on the assumption that like the vast majority of the population, you're not a known criminal informant and are therefore your veracity and character are unknown. Even if Barrack Obama were to call the police and give the same report in this instance, it would be insufficient.
    Are you a judge? Since LEOs don't need to give the person with whom they interact any information regarding RAS, how do you know whether the cop had RAS or not? We don't even know what kind of a "tip" it was. Btw, the court only said that there needed to be some sense of reliability involved... exactly what indicates this level of reliability is up to a court to decide. In just such a case imho, judges tend to give the benefit of doubt to the officer.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

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
  •