12 Jul 10 - Ruck Hump - Open Carry - Police Called (VIDEO LINK)

[ElevenBravo]

Could someone please explain to me what ruck humping is?

What Craig said.

A ruck, is a rucksack, "usually" a military issued backpack

A hump is a long hike, usually a difficult hike due to weather and/or terrain. Loosely used, just a walk.


Soldiers doing a ruck hump:

HTH,
Andrew

 

[VASR9]

Okay. . . new guy here, but what I'm getting from this is kinda chilling to me. I feel like OC equals the good guys and LEO's equal the bad guys. That's not a good image to be putting out there. No I'm not a cop, but I do respect them. If a LEO was to ask for my ID I'd give it to them. I wouldn't feel detained. . . why, I've got nothing to hide. I OC 90 percent of the time, never have an issue. Most cops look at me and nod. Why does everyone ( well almost everyone) paint these men and women in a negative light?

 

[conhntr]

Vast do you have anything to hide in your vehicle? Your house? I don't but I also don't want a police officer to look through either it's called privacy. Where do you draw the line? I draw mine the same place the courts have

 

[ed]

I feel like OC equals the good guys and LEO's equal the bad guys.

I omly speak for myself.. but not at all. In any group of society, there are good guys and bad guys.. thre are good gun owners and bad ones.. good cops and bad ones, etc.

Here is why I dont give up ID or talk to the police:
[video=google;8167533318153586646]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8167533318153586646[/video]

 

[mpd8488]

Okay. . . new guy here, but what I'm getting from this is kinda chilling to me. I feel like OC equals the good guys and LEO's equal the bad guys. ?

95% of the time it isn't a good buys, bad guys sort of thing. Like you said earlier, most cops just nod like they do to any other citizen. But sometimes you get approached by the police and when that happens it is you versus them.

Officers are trained to get people to incriminate themselves and decline their rights. They make requests and that sound an awful lot like orders. For instance if an officer says in a commanding voice, "Do you have some ID?" everyone understands that to mean that he/she would like to see it. But is that really a request? By the letter of the law you may not have to identify yourself but 99% of people will hand over a driver's license. Interviewing a suspect is an art and no matter how smart we think we are, police officers do it better because it is there job.

Officers solve crimes by fishing for any kind of incriminating evidence. There are so many things illegal in this nation that chances are you have in fact committed some sort of crime without every knowing it. Even if you haven't you could still find yourself in trouble after waiving your rights. What if a gun that you bought at a gun show is actually linked to a crime and you allow an officer to run the serial number? What if you have a prescription painkiller floating around in your backpack from an old injury/surgery? What if the previous owner of your used car was a pot smoker and left a roach somewhere that you would never think to look or clean? Those are all long shots, but if an officer doesn't like you for some reason you may find yourself needing a lawyer. Best just to say nothing at all and decline all searches in my opinion.

I hope nobody reads this as police bashing. That is all information that came straight from a former deputy police chief, head of swat, narcotics officer, and head of internal affairs in my home-town throughout his career that instructed an excellent criminal justice class. They have a tough job and they take dangerous people off the streets with those tactics, but it's no fun when you are on the receiving end.

 

[MSC 45ACP]

What is a "Ruck Hump"?

Soldiers enjoy long nature walks while carrying their most valued posessions on their backs along with a few days' food and water. They are usually enjoyed with at least 5 of your best friends and as many as 100. They'd rather walk than ride, but if they decide to ride somewhere, they absolutely refuse anything with creature comforts like air conditioning, doors or a warm, fresh meal. They prefer digging a hole to sleep in over a warm bed with sheets. They are much happier if the hole fills with water so they have the chance to wear their socks over and over again. They love the warm, tingly feeling of Athlete's Foot, so they keep their feet wet and wrinkled with the appearance of Pickled Pig's Feet.

Members of the other armed services enjoy similar activities civilians don't understand. Coasties like going out in small boats in abnormal weather conditions to enjoy Mother Nature's finest attributes. They prefer leaving their families for 6 to 8 weeks at a time to chase the ghosts of 21st century pirates in the Caribbean. They'll return "home" for a couple weeks... Enough time to repair their aging ships and resupply the balky refrigeration systems with mass-produced food intended for prisons. They also scrounge for spare parts to repair other ships' systems that are nearly guranteed to malfunction during the ship's patrol. When they decommission a ship, it is usually accepted gratefully by a museum as a well-preserved example of Early American Naval Vessels. Often, ships of the same class can be found in museums and in active service at the same time. This makes the supply system more difficult as crews of ships sometimes need to "borrow" parts from museums rather than use the usual GSA supply system.

Folks in the Navy enjoy long cruises with lots of other cruise ships with the same destination and schedule. They sometimes stop for a day or two in garden spots around the Mediterranean before lingering a couple hundred miles offshore from the most beautiful beaches in the world while keeping the world safe from democracy. They have a special sub-set of sailors called Submariners. They go under water for 60 to 90 days at a time for no particular reason. They sometimes return to home port with fewer missiles or torpedoes than they left with, but can't tell you where they left them or why. They are different from surface sailors (AKA: skimmers or targets) and recognized easily by their pale skin or recently acquired suuburn.

Marines are the nautical version of the Army. They enjoy similar activites but are generally known to be better marksman than most other servicemen. They are "tighter-knit" and more squared away than most other services and better brainwashed. The Air Force won't let them have the aircraft they need because of a silly agreement made after World War II. They continue to fly aircraft that crash regularly or belong in museums. Similar to the Coast Guard in the respect that they do a lot with very little and most of their equipment is identical to what you find in a museum.

Air Force members are mostly unfamiliar with the term "Ruck Hump" with the exception of a few folks in the Special Warfare community. They include Combat Air Controllers that call in air support when needed. Their rescue swimmers also "work for a living" and share the Coast Guard Rescue Swimmer motto "That Others May Live". The Air Force is the youngest of the armed services and like the youngest child, it usually gets what it wants. They treat their people quite well and ensure they always have warm sheets, cold beer and Air Conditioning. A "hardship" tour for the Air Force is 6 months away from their families 2 or 3 times over a 20 year career. There are some exceptions, but not many.

Army and Marines (and special forces from other services) enjoy "ruck humps" regularly. Naval Special Warfare sailors like to walk in the sand with at least 100 lbs of rocks in their packs. Perhaps they like to build small monuments underwater like Stonehenge for others to find in the future...

 

[ElevenBravo]

I hope nobody reads this as police bashing.

I agree, its more of a "be aware of your rights, your environment, and who you are dealing with, badge or no badge" type lesson. I hope it continues in a constructive manor, I am studiously absorbing as much intel as I can!

 

[VASR9]

Vast do you have anything to hide in your vehicle? Your house? I don't but I also don't want a police officer to look through either it's called privacy. Where do you draw the line? I draw mine the same place the courts have

Actually, I don't anything illegal to hide anywhere. Yes there is a thing called privacy, but most of the information they can get is public knowledge anyway ( not your ssn, but other info). I guess I'm in the minority here, but if they want to search me or my vehicle, knock yourself out and waste your time. I'm not in a hurry to go anywhere anyhow. I could have raise hell when the State Trooper pulled me over because my window tint "looked" to dark, it wasn't and he apologized. I went on my way, no harm no fowl. Paranoia is a bad word and it only makes life more difficult. Call me weird I guess.

 

[longwatch]

You should reconsider your privacy and your rights. Do you know what are considered burglary tools in Virginia and possession of such is a felony? You might be surprised what counts and there are lots of laws like that in which you may be violating with no criminal intent. By forgoing your rights you are giving the LEO the key to your cell and in cases where he does have the right to search the LEO doesn't need your permission.

 

[KBCraig]

Actually, I don't anything illegal to hide anywhere.

LOL!

Are you really that naïve? You don't think you ever do anything or have anything that is illegal? Even if you're truly 100% clean, we read story after story here on OCDO about members who are arrested and charged with something that is not a crime.

This isn't Mayberry any more. It's not cop-bashing to point out the fact that the police are not your friends. What seems like casual conversation to you, is a deliberate attempt by the officer to find something, anything, that will give him cause to search further or interrogate longer or arrest you on the spot. If it all turns out in your favor, he still has credit for the arrest.

You asked earlier where others draw the line. Here's where I draw mine:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[KBCraig]

Wow, talk about timely!

Here's a great example that was just posted today:

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...ions-Like-This-One-Are-Why-We-Carry-Recorders

 

[NovaCop]

You should reconsider your privacy and your rights. Do you know what are considered burglary tools in Virginia and possession of such is a felony? You might be surprised what counts and there are lots of laws like that in which you may be violating with no criminal intent. By forgoing your rights you are giving the LEO the key to your cell and in cases where he does have the right to search the LEO doesn't need your permission.

Having "burglarious tools" in VA is not a crime in itself... the code clearly states that you also need probable cause to charge someone who possesses such tools does so with the INTENT TO COMMIT BURGLARY (18.2-94). Intent/negligence (usually brought up civilly, but can be appropriate to use for criminal matters as well) is always involved in charging someone. I am not against anyone invoking their rights. It's kind of odd that you bring up that you might be breaking a law and not realize it, so everyone should not speak to LEOs so they don't get caught (meaning that you are for criminals getting away). I do not agree that police have any malice intent when speaking with someone (which is kind of the theme going on in this thread). I think we can all agree that police catch criminals (our prisons are overflowing and crowded unlike any other country). How do you think police catch criminals? They have to interact with them. Police don't know you, and are attempting to investigate a bit so obviously they will be interacting with honest law abiding citizens as well. Even before I was a LEO, I cooperated with them because I had no reason not to. Keep in mind there is a lot of discretion given to LEOs. I won't pretend that some officers might interpret you being non compliant as being disrespectful and might be more likely to charge you with something (if a crime occurred).

I didn't listen to that audio feed of what that officer said. Going by what the article said, he should be fired and held liable civilly and criminally. Just like all jobs, there are people that shouldn't have them. It's good the weed the bad ones out. Only the negative incidents involving police make the news, the 1 million other incidents that were handled correctly that day didn't.

 

[ODA 226]

Having "burglarious tools" in VA is not a crime in itself... the code clearly states that you also need probable cause to charge someone who possesses such tools does so with the INTENT TO COMMIT BURGLARY (18.2-94).

I'm an ex-LEO and I think you are wrong here! Read the entire statute!:

18.2-94. Possession of burglarious tools, etc.
If any person have in his possession any tools, implements or outfit, with intent to commit burglary, robbery or larceny, upon conviction thereof he shall be guilty of a Class 5 felony. The possession of such burglarious tools, implements or outfit by any person other than a licensed dealer, shall be prima facie evidence of an intent to commit burglary, robbery or larceny.

If you're not licenced to have said tools and are caught with them you are guilty of a Class 5 Felony!

 

[peter nap]

ODA's right. The courts looked at "burglarious tools" with intent at one time but the tools could be as simple as a Leatherman with a screwdriver. As with most vague laws, many PD's abused them and arrested people for simply loitering at odd times with simple tools.

The current wording is intended to limit the types of tools such as lock picks or safe drills.

Now intent goes hand in hand with the possession of the restricted tools. Intent is still a viable defense but convictions are easier because of the kind of tools in the suspects possession.

 

[jmlefler]

"I'm not saying that all LEOs are the most professional people out there, but I will say that it is a small majority. LEOs aren't out there to illegally seize you and your property. We don't gain anything from that obviously, besides opening up ourselves (and department) up to civil, criminal, and employment consequences (not to mention all the paperwork that is involved in seizures/arrests)."

1. Since I don't know which are not the most professional people out there, and they still wield tremendous power, I would being any encounter with a full, firm, positive stance on my rights as a citizen

2. Police Departments gain plenty from property siezures; many budgets are supplanted by items siezed and sold at auction.

Carry on

 

[NovaCop]

I'm an ex-LEO and I think you are wrong here! Read the entire statute!:

18.2-94. Possession of burglarious tools, etc.
If any person have in his possession any tools, implements or outfit, with intent to commit burglary, robbery or larceny, upon conviction thereof he shall be guilty of a Class 5 felony. The possession of such burglarious tools, implements or outfit by any person other than a licensed dealer, shall be prima facie evidence of an intent to commit burglary, robbery or larceny.

If you're not licenced to have said tools and are caught with them you are guilty of a Class 5 Felony!

I'm not sure what area you have experience with obtaining these charges, but my dept's legal instructor has time and time again told us you need the intent to commit a burglary part to get the burglarious tools charge. In fact, I have had a burglarious tools charge denied by magistrates before, after getting gloves, screwdrivers, wire cutters off someone walking down the street at 3 a.m. towards an apartment parking lot (consent) because I could not prove he had the intent to commit a burglary/larceny (larceny from auto most likely especially given his 4 previous charges and that he is unemployed and stated he "found the items").

If anyone can find a case law where an officer charged someone with burglarious tools without proving at first that they were intending to use it for a burglary, please send me the case. Especially a case where someone was charged for merely having a leatherman tool.

 

[NovaCop]

"I'm not saying that all LEOs are the most professional people out there, but I will say that it is a small majority. LEOs aren't out there to illegally seize you and your property. We don't gain anything from that obviously, besides opening up ourselves (and department) up to civil, criminal, and employment consequences (not to mention all the paperwork that is involved in seizures/arrests)."

1. Since I don't know which are not the most professional people out there, and they still wield tremendous power, I would being any encounter with a full, firm, positive stance on my rights as a citizen

2. Police Departments gain plenty from property siezures; many budgets are supplanted by items siezed and sold at auction.

Carry on

You are free to exhibit your rights, and nothing is wrong with that. Seizures do bring in money for departments. Actually it's a 50/50 split between the police department and the commonwealth attorney's office. However, if the items were illegally seized, they would be given back and allow you to file a lawsuit of your own.

 

[ProShooter]

It's not cop-bashing to point out the fact that the police are not your friends

I hear this all the time, and I think its also important to point out that the police are not your enemies either. They are out there to do a job. They must look at everyone equally in doing that job.

 

[ufcfanvt]

...
If anyone can find a case law where an officer charged someone with burglarious tools without proving at first that they were intending to use it for a burglary, please send me the case. Especially a case where someone was charged for merely having a leatherman tool.

OK

From the 8/5/2008 VCDL Alert (presumably written by VCDL President Philip Van Cleave):

Right after September 11, 2001, one of our members, who was a courier,
was directed to deliver a part to a nuclear power plant.

The member wasn't a dummy. He knew that security would be tight to
the point of paranoid, so he unloaded his concealed handgun, left it
in plain view on his seat, parked well back of the guard gate, and
walked up to the guard gate unarmed.

Indeed there was a young state trooper at the gate, in addition to
normal security. The trooper noticed the EMPTY shoulder holster and
asked the VCDL member if he had a gun. The VCDL member answered
truthfully that he did back in his car.

The trooper went the the member's car and proceeded to "read him the
riot act." However, the officer was out of line as the member was
doing nothing illegal.

Then the officer asked, "Can I search your car?"

The member thinking that he was a good guy and had absolutely nothing
to hide, said, "Sure!"

Bad, bad, bad mistake.

The officer searched the inside of the car and then popped the trunk.

The officer looked in the trunk and then stood up and advised the
permit holder to put his hands behind his back and he arrested the
permit holder.

The shocked permit holder asked what the officer had found.

The officer said, "You have a bolt cutter in the trunk. That is
considered a burglary tool in Virginia. I am charging you with
possession of burglary tools AND felony attempt to sabotage a nuclear
power plant!"

The member (and most of you, I'll bet) had no idea that having bolt
cutters in your trunk was a crime! Remember, the law books can cover
a huge amount of space in a library. Buried in those books are laws
against more things than you can possibly imagine!

The member went straight to PRISON for THREE DAYS, until he could be
arraigned.

In the end ALL charges were dropped, but the member was out some
serious money, lost many night's sleep, and lost his job.

 

[ufcfanvt]

I'm not sure what area you have experience with obtaining these charges, but my dept's legal instructor has time and time again told us you need the intent to commit a burglary part to get the burglarious tools charge. In fact, I have had a burglarious tools charge denied by magistrates before, after getting gloves, screwdrivers, wire cutters off someone walking down the street at 3 a.m. towards an apartment parking lot (consent) because I could not prove he had the intent to commit a burglary/larceny (larceny from auto most likely especially given his 4 previous charges and that he is unemployed and stated he "found the items").

If anyone can find a case law where an officer charged someone with burglarious tools without proving at first that they were intending to use it for a burglary, please send me the case. Especially a case where someone was charged for merely having a leatherman tool.

Furthermore, given the wording in the law, an LEO is technically forced to arrest you for such possession. The fact that your department instructs otherwise notwithstanding.
§ 18.2-94

§ 18.2-94. Possession of burglarious tools, etc.
If any person have in his possession any tools, implements or outfit, with intent to commit burglary, robbery or larceny, upon conviction thereof he shall be guilty of a Class 5 felony. The possession of such burglarious tools, implements or outfit by any person other than a licensed dealer, shall be prima facie evidence of an intent to commit burglary, robbery or larceny.

The law now places the arrested subject in the dubious position of proving/disproving this alleged, legally assumed intent.