• 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.

Stepping out of car at school while armed

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
"Many" is not "Most"

Oh I'm not upset. I just see this thread (like so many others before it) heading down a road that it doesn't need to go down. Its only a matter of time now before someone throws the "jack booted thug" comment into the conversation, which is usually the icing on the cake.

Please re-read the text. He said "most" not "all" or "most" -- on that basis, I believe that is accurate.

LEOs can be deceptive -- that's legal. Because it is in face legal for cops to lie, many do.

Some even lie in court -- it's called "testilying" -- look it up if you wish.

Finally, criticizing bad cops for doing bad things isn't condemning all cops.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Party pooper.

:banana:

I don't mind the Jack booted thugs Wylde.
It's thosexxx cops that give me the jitters:eek:
I wonder how long this lasts:lol:

I'll save the Admin the trouble...That was bad even for me:banana:
 
Last edited:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Capture-2.png


"All" and "Most" can be concrete numbers, "Many" is an observation and there's nothing wrong with making an observation.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
"All" and "Most" can be concrete numbers, "Many" is an observation and there's nothing wrong with making an observation.
Ohh... math!

"All" and "most" have absolute definitons... "All" is fairly obvious, "most" is 1/2 plus one*.

"Many" is completely subjective and can be any number from "2" through "All".

Math according to TFred...

ETA: * One could argue in a set of distinct types of elements, "most" could mean the set of elements which has the most members...
 
Last edited:

ProShooter

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
4,663
Location
www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
Please re-read the text. He said "most" not "all" or "most" -- on that basis, I believe that is accurate.

LEOs can be deceptive -- that's legal. Because it is in face legal for cops to lie, many do.

Some even lie in court -- it's called "testilying" -- look it up if you wish.

Finally, criticizing bad cops for doing bad things isn't condemning all cops.

Oh I read the text correctly. I understand exactly what is being said. As for bad cops, I couldn't agree more. They should be punished. As should bad doctors, bad lawyers, bad dentists, and anyone else that we put trust in to do a job to the best of their ability.

Last week after the VCDL meeting, someone ordered a baked potato at the restaurant. They were told that it was cooking, and then later told that there were no more baked potatoes available. Obviously, either the waiter was badly mistaken, or he lied. Should we say that most waiters routinely lie?

The problem here, is that there seems to be some thread on a regular basis that paints LEO's in a bad light. Do some of them deserve it? Absolutely. Skidmark's current situation comes to mind - it appears that the LEO made a bad call, to say the least. I think though that new folks who read these threads will start to believe that a police officer's sole mission in life is to deny you your right to carry, and that you will be jacked up at every opportunity. Some people here complain that "an officer gets to carry here and there and I can't". Don't blame the officer. Blame the legislature. If you don't like a law, do something positive to effect change. I didn't get into LE to carry where others cannot, I got into it to do the job. I have been out of uniform for 3 years now, and have never run into these "JBT's" that some seem to have a problem with. I OC quite often, and run into LEO's who I may know, or who I have never met before. I carry myself in an adult manner and go about my business. I know what the laws are, what my rights and responsibilities are, and I handle myself accordingly.
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Oh I read the text correctly. I understand exactly what is being said. As for bad cops, I couldn't agree more. They should be punished. As should bad doctors, bad lawyers, bad dentists, and anyone else that we put trust in to do a job to the best of their ability.

Some people here complain that "an officer gets to carry here and there and I can't". Don't blame the officer. Blame the legislature. If you don't like a law, do something positive to effect change.

Well, the LEO Organizations and various chiefs will at times appear before Committees and explain what THEY want, and at times, the General Assembly will give them what they want. So, I can blame them both under the circumstances.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Well, the LEO Organizations and various chiefs will at times appear before Committees and explain what THEY want, and at times, the General Assembly will give them what they want. So, I can blame them both under the circumstances.

That's true.
I've thought for years, that the way to make CHP info confidential, was to publish the names and address of LEO family members who had them.

The Police lobby would scream to the heavens.
 

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
I am not sure how this thread turned anti-LEO but I will chime in. I wouldn't mind anyone knowing my family member has a CHP, in fact, I would rather them know. One common advantage I hear about open carrying (on this site) is that it will deter a criminal if they know you are open carrying. So isn't them knowing you have a CHP pretty much the same?

I hate bad LEOs probably more than any of you do, they personally give me a bad name. However, I hear arguments about LEOs being allowed to use deception. Well of course they do. There is a difference between using deception to catch a criminal and lying to incriminate a non criminal. It's easy to tell one from the other if you are in the business. Unless you work as a LEO, you really don't have much understanding of the job besides what you see on tv or read about. The positive incidents by LEOs don't make youtube or the news, it's that one percent that do.

Some posts above address that if you comply with a LEOs orders to get out, he can then arrest you for carrying on school property. Obviously that would never fly. It's like a LEO ordering someone drinking a beer in there house outside and arresting them for drunk in public. Or like you not stopping on the roadway when an ambulance is driving with it's lights on because you fear you would be cited for stopping. There is no govt conspiracy against you and carrying.

If a LEO has you legally seized in a car on school property and orders you out and your response is "no because I have a gun" while you try to handle your cell to call 9-1-1 (to request a supervisor), I can only imagine what negative experience you would encounter. Think about it people.

Now I heard someone being irritated that they can't carry where LEOs can. Federal HR218 which pretty much gives a universal carry permit to every sworn officer with arrest powers the right to carry in any state where there LEOs can carry. I won't get into debate about this topic. You always have the choice to be a LEO? Why not?
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
I hate bad LEOs probably more than any of you do, they personally give me a bad name. However, I hear arguments about LEOs being allowed to use deception. Well of course they do. There is a difference between using deception to catch a criminal and lying to incriminate a non criminal. It's easy to tell one from the other if you are in the business.
With all due respect, and I do generally respect LEOs...

Here is the problem with your mindset: Definitions of words do not change based on the moral context or end results of their usage.

From the Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary, we have:

Definition of LIE
intransitive verb
1: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2: to create a false or misleading impression
The reason for telling a lie does not change the fact that it is, in fact, a lie. The person to whom a lie is told also does not change the fact that is a lie.

That was the point I took from the post that made the original reference: "many police officers routinely lie", and as I later pointed out, LEOs assume they are correct in their assessment of who the "bad guys" are. That means that sometimes they will be wrong, and in those cases, they are in fact, lying in an attempt to incriminate guiltless parties.

You have obviously convinced yourself that your morals and your professional obligations allow you to skate this line. That is your prerogative. There is nothing in this thread that is LEO-bashing, simply because nothing here has been said that you and other LEOs do not freely admit.

The issue under debate is whether in this one particular case, the act of lying is immoral. I haven't made that judgment... the standard definition and widely held understanding of the word itself has done that for you already. You have simply convinced yourself that your job excuses you from that moral standard that the rest of us have been taught all our lives.

If you feel it is bashing LEOs to state that many of them routinely lie, then perhaps you should reconsider the practice of, in fact, routinely lying to do the job.

TFred
 

45acpForMe

Newbie
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
2,805
Location
Yorktown, Virginia, USA
<snip> I wouldn't mind anyone knowing my family member has a CHP, in fact, I would rather them know. One common advantage I hear about open carrying (on this site) is that it will deter a criminal if they know you are open carrying. So isn't them knowing you have a CHP pretty much the same?

People get CHP's for different reasons but usually because they want to CONCEAL their pistol and to be able to defend themselves. By publishing the information it has allowed dangerous people to locate the people that were trying to defend against. It has serious implications and is irresponsible to broadcast just like broadcasting state funded abused spouse safehouse addresses.

I have had several good encounters with local LEO, York County, Newport News & VA Beach. I learned of a Deputy in York County that won the FOP award this year and was going to send him a congratulations, but when I went to York County Sheriffs page only the sheriff was listed and no info (even names) of deputies. While it cut short my congratulatory email, I understand that people want a level of privacy to protect them and their family.

<snip>
Now I heard someone being irritated that they can't carry where LEOs can. Federal HR218 which pretty much gives a universal carry permit to every sworn officer with arrest powers the right to carry in any state where there LEOs can carry. I won't get into debate about this topic. You always have the choice to be a LEO? Why not?

I have no problem with LEO being allowed to CC. I just think constitutional carry is best. LEO don't necessarily have more training, experience, accuracy than a law abiding citizen. Why discriminate? Punish the criminal when he commits a crime and don't create a criminal by creating more laws than a law abiding citizen can keep up with. (eg. GFSZ)
 

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
People get CHP's for different reasons but usually because they want to CONCEAL their pistol and to be able to defend themselves. By publishing the information it has allowed dangerous people to locate the people that were trying to defend against. It has serious implications and is irresponsible to broadcast just like broadcasting state funded abused spouse safehouse addresses.

I have had several good encounters with local LEO, York County, Newport News & VA Beach. I learned of a Deputy in York County that won the FOP award this year and was going to send him a congratulations, but when I went to York County Sheriffs page only the sheriff was listed and no info (even names) of deputies. While it cut short my congratulatory email, I understand that people want a level of privacy to protect them and their family.



I have no problem with LEO being allowed to CC. I just think constitutional carry is best. LEO don't necessarily have more training, experience, accuracy than a law abiding citizen. Why discriminate? Punish the criminal when he commits a crime and don't create a criminal by creating more laws than a law abiding citizen can keep up with. (eg. GFSZ)

Everyone should be entitled to some level of privacy. I am not aware of CHP information being published publicly but only law enforcement sensitive. Am I wrong about that? Constitutional carry vs concealed both have their pros and cons, and I agree it's best left up to the choice of the one carrying. I support both. While I would agree that it is not necessarily fact that LEOs have more training, experience, and accuracy, I would argue that they do have a higher level of expectations. LEOs have to qualify twice a year (including night shooting), some some legal training, and are backed by their department. I think the whole argument of HR218 is to help to enforce laws and assist with other agencies (stopping short of enforcing their laws), and not self defense. I am not saying LEOs are by any means more entitled to self defense.
 

Wolf_shadow

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
1,215
Location
Accomac, Virginia, USA
Everyone should be entitled to some level of privacy. I am not aware of CHP information being published publicly but only law enforcement sensitive. Am I wrong about that? Constitutional carry vs concealed both have their pros and cons, and I agree it's best left up to the choice of the one carrying. I support both. While I would agree that it is not necessarily fact that LEOs have more training, experience, and accuracy, I would argue that they do have a higher level of expectations. LEOs have to qualify twice a year (including night shooting), some some legal training, and are backed by their department. I think the whole argument of HR218 is to help to enforce laws and assist with other agencies (stopping short of enforcing their laws), and not self defense. I am not saying LEOs are by any means more entitled to self defense.

I'm unable to find the thread now but there was an instance where an paper obtained the CHP info for everyone in the state and put the database online for anyone to search, and one paper that routinely prints the newly issued CHP's in the local area (not sure if that has stopped now or not).
I want to say it was the Richmond Times Dispatch that posted the database but I may be wrong. It was quickly taken down after the outcry they received from CHP holders, and the legislature passed a bill preventing the VSP from releasing the information again to anyone but LE. But anyone can still go to the local court house and get the information. That's how the one paper kept printing the local information.

Just found it. It was the Roanoke Times not Richmond. Here is an article about the issue. http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/109163
 
Last edited:

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
Ohh... math!

"All" and "most" have absolute definitons... "All" is fairly obvious, "most" is 1/2 plus one*.

"Many" is completely subjective and can be any number from "2" through "All".

Math according to TFred...

ETA: * One could argue in a set of distinct types of elements, "most" could mean the set of elements which has the most members...

"Some" is < all, most, and many but >1.
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
I'm unable to find the thread now but there was an instance where an paper obtained the CHP info for everyone in the state and put the database online for anyone to search, and one paper that routinely prints the newly issued CHP's in the local area (not sure if that has stopped now or not).
I want to say it was the Richmond Times Dispatch that posted the database but I may be wrong. It was quickly taken down after the outcry they received from CHP holders, and the legislature passed a bill preventing the VSP from releasing the information again to anyone but LE. But anyone can still go to the local court house and get the information. That's how the one paper kept printing the local information.
If I remember correctly it was a newspaper in TENNESSEE! I am willing to be corrected if my memory is "DIS-REMEMBERING!"
 

CenTex

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
276
Location
,,
There are serious issues with the law. Unfortunately relying on an officer's ability to make proper application of a law is a terrible gamble in this day and age. Then you have to consider the "idiot factor" when dealing with an officer in such a situation.

This is not to say that every officer is trying to entrap a citizen on a federal weapons offense or every officer is an idiot.

The law would serve better as an enhanced penalty to preexisting crimes. If you commit armed robbery within 1,000 feet of a school, then you automatically get 5 years (or whatever amount of time) added to the sentence and so on. I don't think any of us want gun violence on school grounds in particular, but this law seeks to make a criminal out of someone going about their business peaceably.

I keep telling my wife, "If you want to be a criminal, just wait. Eventually they will pass a law to make you one."
 

Wolf_shadow

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
1,215
Location
Accomac, Virginia, USA
Last edited:

sultan62

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,311
Location
Clayton, NC
Now I heard someone being irritated that they can't carry where LEOs can. Federal HR218 which pretty much gives a universal carry permit to every sworn officer with arrest powers the right to carry in any state where there LEOs can carry. I won't get into debate about this topic. You always have the choice to be a LEO? Why not?

Please tell me that I misunderstood this. The way I read it, you are suggesting that those of us who want to be allowed to carry where LEOS can carry should just become a LEO.

I very much hope this is not the reason people are becoming LEOs.
 

45acpForMe

Newbie
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
2,805
Location
Yorktown, Virginia, USA
While I would agree that it is not necessarily fact that LEOs have more training, experience, and accuracy, I would argue that they do have a higher level of expectations. LEOs have to qualify twice a year (including night shooting), some some legal training, and are backed by their department. I think the whole argument of HR218 is to help to enforce laws and assist with other agencies (stopping short of enforcing their laws), and not self defense. I am not saying LEOs are by any means more entitled to self defense.

Yes I know that LEO have to qualify each year. I hear of Police trade-in guns that have been fired twice (once per each qualification). I don't go through official qualification (others might) but do try to shoot weekly. Between rifle and pistol I am averaging about 2500 rounds a year. (not including friends guns). LEO may have more person on person combat training than I do but many here are ex-military and have similar training.

Again I have absolutely no problem with LEO being allowed to carry anywhere. What I get frustrated with is going into a place (store/mall/airport/school/etc) and seeing signs that LEO are allowed to carry but I am not. Now I understand there are goofs-with-guns and they should be weeded out but nothing in my past, history, background check, etc shows any reason to not trust me and allow me the self defense protection of carrying a firearm anywhere.

What kind of sick legislator thinks that by stepping on school property (or federal GFSZ within 1000 feet of school property) with a firearm (properly holstered) should be a felony FIRST offense! With no showing of criminal intent and brandishing at worst it should be a low level fine like a speeding ticket. At best it should be 100% legal. So someone going for a walk and carrying normally can wind up on school property, be a felon, go to jail with mandatory sentences and lose their rights to own a gun forever.
 
Last edited:

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
CHP Privacy

We're careening wildly off topic here, but with that in mind... I can tell you a little bit about the CHP privacy issue, primarily because that is the issue that brought be back into the RKBA world after many years of simply not paying attention.

I can tell you for certain that as recently as the summer of 2008, several newspapers around the state, including my local paper, the Free Lance-Star, routinely published the names and streets of residence of all new CHP grantees. Once a month, the newspaper literally sent a staff member on what I imagine was an all day road trip to the four or five jurisdictions in the local readership area to collect the names. I discussed this with at least two of the Clerks offices, and it became so routine, they would almost have the print-outs ready and waiting for them. (I say "almost", I did not ask if that was literally the case, but month after month the same, you get my drift. "Hey Joe, here's your list. Thanks, see you next month...")

As reported, a few months prior to the development of my interest, the Roanoke Times had indeed sought and received from the Virginia State Police a soft copy of the entire database, which they did put on-line. The reaction was swift and furious, and led to subsequent legislation which closed only one of the two major doors that leaked this information. The legislation was amended and debated over the course of two General Assembly sessions, and it could have easily shut down all public access. I suspect that this put the "Fear of God" into most of the local newspapers, who saw that they were in danger of losing their beloved ability to report on the minuscule number of criminals who had CHPs. I firmly believe this is why nearly all of them voluntarily stopped printing the lists.

Now back to today, in spite of at least two years trying to close the gaping hole left open at the Clerk of the Courts offices through further legislative action (and the failure of that legislation due to the liberal anti-gun Virginia Senate, and their illegal subcommittee), anybody can go to any local court, and ask for and receive any CHP application, or the whole list. To the best of my knowledge, there are no restrictions on what one may do with this list. Since CHPs are granted through the court system, the information is considered public by default, just as a deed to a house, a marriage license, or a last will and testament are.

One of the more frustrating aspects of this effort was the publication of the Attorney General's opinion in April 2007 on the matter. AG Bob McDonnell wrote that in his opinion, current law protected the use of CHP information from all but official use. Sadly, the opinion did nothing to stop the practice, and we all learned one of several hard lessons on just how worthless the opinion of the Attorney General really is.

I am afraid that unless or until some single mom whose hiding place is discovered by her stalker ex-boyfriend/husband through her CHP application and she is hunted down and murdered, this issue will never get resolved. Especially not as long as we continue to allow the Virginia Senate to conduct their sessions in violation of their own rules.

TFred
 
Top