Oceanside UOC Stop

IYAOYAS said:

Just an update: Today I went and talked to the supervisor at the OPD about the incident. The SGT. seemed like a really good guy and pro 2A I brought up the three issues that I had with the conduct of the officers involved i.e. Search of serial number, physically detained, and search of my person. We both agreed that this is a training issue that needed to be addressed with the junior officers, He said that he would bring these issues up with the DA and inform me of what they say. He said that the officer was new to the force and training would be implemented. I kinda wish that excuse worked with traffic tickets.
Im sorry your honor I am a new driver I wasn't aware of all the little traffic ordinances.
I informed him that as long as it is legal I will continue to UOC and when I feel my rights are violated I will comply with orders while verbally protesting and I will not physically resist his officers. He said he wished more people protested as peaceful as I did.
In conclusion I think that the issues will be dealt with through the chain of cmd. I feel that we have all learned from the experience and the OPD and UOCer's are kinda on the same page. Still there is much work to do because the general public doesn't have this understanding and they will continue to call the Police on law abiding citizens exercising their rights openly which will continue to be a waste of the Police departments time and tax payer dollars. I think that officers should follow up with "concerned" citizens that call them on UOCers and explain to the citizen that it is perfectly legal for a person to UOC in california.

Click to expand...

This should be a question asked of LE when they say to you "Someone called in a complaint about a MWAG".

"Oh, well officer have you made contact with the reporting party yet? Id be more than happy to talk to them about the law, especially in your presence so they feel safe. Thats one of the reasons I choose to UOC is to educate the public and LE about the laws and our rights as citizens."

Remember the MWAG complaint comment can be a verbal judo move to get you to comply, to relinquishing your 4A rights and consent to a voluntary encounter. Believe it or not that comment may just be a lie:shocker:, LE has been known to lie to get compliance. The dispatcher should have relayed a description of not only you, the UOC'r, but the caller as well, and LEO are suppose to make contact with reporting parties to get information first hand about an incident so they can document it in their report. Remember LE can not charge you with a crime they themselves didnt see:banghead::banghead:, they require a witness willing to place a citizens arrest and testify in court as to the crime you commited. When they show up, I bet many are hoping that they can just engage a UOC'r and catch them breaking the law somehow just for the simple fact your carrying a gun, and a witness statement isnt even necessary. But many LE agencies are starting to realizing that EVERY encounter now with UOC'rs is recorded:cuss: and will be on youtube by the end of their shift, with most likely an official complaint letter or lawsuit coming very soon.

I agree wholehartedly with Cato record all your correspondence with LE complaint or compliment emails or letters. Even face to face, in this civil rights struggle documentation and proof of lies and falsehoods will be critical in swaying public opinion.

IYAOYAS said:

Finally got the video downloaded to here is the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RF7VQH0H_I

Click to expand...

Coming late to this thread. Sorry you got e-violated. Good job during the encounter affirming and protecting your rights and identity and getting it all on tape. Question: did you inform or show the video to the supervisor?

The sad thing about this is IMO the police departments in this state will not take the 4th seriously during 12031(e) violations until someone sues them and they lose big. Then and only then will they take their profession and their training on the issue much more seriously.

Funny...because as I write this I realize they have already been sued and lost...that was El Sensei's case in San Diego (or maybe they settled don't remember off hand). But it appears now that more than one lawsuit is needed here.

The police are free to "ask" you to do anything. It's up to you on if you want to do it or not. they can ask for your name. You aren't required to give it unless your arrested.

MikeJ said:

The police are free to "ask" you to do anything. It's up to you on if you want to do it or not. they can ask for your name. You aren't required to give it unless your arrested.

Click to expand...

That's not entirely true of course. Didn't you say you have a degree in Administration of Justice in a different thread?

MK said:

That's not entirely true of course. Didn't you say you have a degree in Administration of Justice in a different thread?

Click to expand...

Unless your cited or arrested your not required to provide your information. What is not correct about that? I'm not sure how it is in your state but that is now it is in California. Driving is different because a license is required. After being pulled over the driver is required to provide ID.

If you're in a state with a stop and identify statute and the officer has reasonable and articulable suspicion that a crime has or is about to take place then he/she can request that you identify yourself by name. See Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District of Nevada.

California doesn't have a stop and identify statute though, so unless you've violated something in the vehicle code, there is no need to identify yourself. Do you have a citation MikeJ that one has to identify oneself upon arrest?