brk913
Regular Member
Although I agree with your above comments and have informed my friends of the consequences of violating the rights of permit holders as well as any other citizens. I am not so sure a court would agree that approaching an armed person and disarming them while they "investigate" the situation would be considered an abuse under color of law (again I am not agreeing with it just stating what I have seen and heard when it comes to complaints against abuse of power, look at Philadelphia where they say they will continue to harrass OCers and they have allowable OC written right into the laws). FYI I also do not take legal advice from the police and have informed my friends that I do know the law and will follow it, I ask them to do the same. Again, I am on your side here, just relaying what I have been told. If you do not want to believe what I have been told that is your right. As ar as the "cite to authority" I will not drag my friends names through the mud no matter how ignorant they may be.
The answer to this question is yes, this was a husband and wife who applied at the same time. They filed an immediate appeal and contacted the DPS to see if the background check had been sent back to HPD (it had been sent back to HPD a month earlier, contrary to what HPD told them). Results: They received their temp permits 4 days later (guess HPD realized they were on the wrong end of that battle). My point was that their are so many LEO who think they can do what they want because most people will not call them out on it, if more people did things would change.
This was a response to the above poster who stated: Ah yes the" you will be arrested" line... funny how we hear that too in MI but there hase been only one actual arrest and in that case several people were fired and the OCer got a settlement.
I am not asserting that if you OC you will be charged with BOP, in fact as I have stated several times in this thread I OC about half the time, if I really thought that it warranted any charge do you think I would continue to OC?
I am not citing anecdotal evidence, I am stating that in fact LEO have in the past and probably continue to "do whatever they want" and have gotten away with it, I am not saying I like it or agree with it.
Your unicycle analogy does not match up, we are talking about OC and the police believeing that OC is illegal, you know as well as I do that some officers just don't get it. Again, I am sure if someone can get revocation information for the past 20 years you will find numerous people who have lost their permit over it. This is part of the reason we are in the situation we are in, up until the last few years no one has called them on it. Again I am not telling anyone not to OC, still not sure why you do not understand that.
My point is that Goldberg may have been the last but prior to him standing his ground and fighting back how many others lost their permits and/or guns? We may never know.
That was posted on their website for at least 15 years and no one called them on it till Goldberg. Although you say it carried no weight it sure has shaped the way LE continues to this day to argue the legality of OC, in fact I saw a post here within the last week or so where someone stated that the PD quoted that to them. That is why it is relevant.
It has to do with the fact that you stated, "I didn't spend a dime defending myself." which may be true for legal fees but there are other costs involved.
ONE MORE TIME SO YOU CAN HEAR ME, I AM NOT TRYING TO SCARE ANYONE OUT OF ANYTHING, GO OC ALL YOU WANT, I FULLY SUPPORT IT AND WILL STAND WITH YOU AND IN FACT IN FRONT OF YOU IF YOU WISH, BUT IF YOU WANT ME TO SAY THAT THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN GET INTO A JAM FOR IT THAT WOULD BE A LIE DUE TO THE FACT THERE ARE STILL LEO WHO DO NOT UNDERSTAND AND FOLLOW THRE LAW. Granted in the end you will more than likely be exonerated for any "trouble" you get into but it could still prove a hassle for some.
I do not understand how it is irrelevant, it shows a continued pattern of abusing the laws to the benefit of the police officers. I did not want to get into details on any of these but will give you one example. A friend was driving to get cofee in Berlin in his bosses car (boss sent him out in it). What he did not mention to my friend is his registration was expired and he had a small bag of pot under the seat. My friend was pulled over and was carrying his pistol, incident to the arrest for expired reg and prior to towing the car they searched it, found the pot and arrested my ffriend and seized his pistol and permit, they shipped his permit off to DPS. After going to court where the case was thrown out due to it not being his vehicle he was able to immediatly recover his seized pistol from the PD, however, due to the fact that he no longer held a valid permit I actually had to go down there and pick it up with him. The DPS held his permit till just before his appeal to the BOFPE (almost a year) and then just mailed it back to him prior to his appeal being heard. Did the Berlin PD get in trouble for what they did? Did the DPS tell them they were wrong? The answer is no. Could my friend have tried to sue them? Maybe but that costs money, money he does not have. Can we ask to have the officer who seized the permit arrested for violating state statute? I doubt it. So please tell me Rich, what is the remedy here? How can we get it to stop if we cannot afford to sue? Even if you do sue the courts always seem to hold the police to a lower standard. Remember the State Trooper who had an accidental discharge at the Bushnell, he did not lose his permit, get reprimanded or anything else, what do you think would have happened if it was you or I?
