Detained by NPD yet AGAIN!!!

[ProShooter]

imported post

DocDaddy wrote:

ProShooter wrote:

peter nap wrote:

Malum Prohibitum wrote:

glockfan wrote:

I don't think you're helping society if the goal is to allow people to openly carry a firearm and not have to show ID when asked by a LEO.

Glockfan, who is "you," and to what help to society do you refer? I really do not understand what you are trying to say or to whom it is directed or why.

:?

I vote just a guy with a Glock!

mmmm Glock mmmmm!

I didn't know Glocks made a revolver? Hahaha! :celebrate

Its a secret experimental model.......only Homer knows.....

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

Hey, here's an idea: let's see how many times we can quote a post with a giant pic in it.

And yes, I think the guy is probably JAGWAG.

 

[kimbercarrier]

imported post

Sorry to hear the idiots are at it again. But you handled it well as usual. I guess they're not going to be happy until the city goes broke paying for lawsuits and is renamed Danville.

 

[DocDaddy]

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

Hey, here's an idea: let's see how many times we can quote a post with a giant pic in it.

And yes, I think the guy is probably JAGWAG.

You know I thought about taking out the giant pic... but then again my momma told never to think! Plus it is even funnier to see Homer back to back... and now that ProShooter did a third time makes it even funnier!!!! :lol::celebrate:lol::celebrate:lol::celebrate

IANAL: But take panties off, un-bunch, put back on.


Back to OP topic...

 

[cato]

imported post

Dan, your attorney needs to send a 8'X11" glossy picture of you (BMWAG hat and all!)to each officer of that department (Chief to newest recruit)viacertified return receipt mail along with all case law, training memos, AG opinions, and the Virginia and US Constitutions. Put them all on notice!

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

Hey, here's an idea: let's see how many times we can quote a post with a giant pic in it.

And yes, I think the guy is probably JAGWAG.

Once is enough to write a filter for it. 41 out of 86 calls on this page are filtered out, emoticons and avatars.

 

[Repeater]

imported post

danbus wrote:

I know most of you would have shown ID, not because you didn't want to stand up for your rights, but most you have families to provide for. But I'm single, don't have any kids, and it was my day off.

Just goes to show that Sterile Carry doesn't mean you don't have balls!

 

[DHCruiser]

imported post

Sorry to hear it, Dan. Give em hell

 

[pourshot]

imported post

What can we say -- DanbusTED seems to be a magnet....



Edit to add....



Did the bus have any on board surveillance equipment?

 

[Cynic]

imported post

IF the MEMBERS of the City Council had to pony up $10,000, that would have been something.

The CITY having to pay Dan $10,000 means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! It isn't even a small fraction of one percent of the city budget. It is just NOISE. They don't care.

Until the CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THEMSELVES, or INDIVIDUAL POLICE OFFICERS get slammed with judgments and have to pay them, it isn't going to change.

The City Council members asked their attorney if THEY could PERSONALLY be held responsible and face any risk. He correctly said no. This is very sad.

Those cops know the same thing. They can screw with anyone, and face NOTHING!

 

[Neplusultra]

imported post

Cynic wrote:

IF the MEMBERS of the City Council had to pony up $10,000, that would have been something.

The CITY having to pay Dan $10,000 means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! It isn't even a small fraction of one percent of the city budget. It is just NOISE. They don't care.

Until the CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THEMSELVES, or INDIVIDUAL POLICE OFFICERS get slammed with judgments and have to pay them, it isn't going to change.

The City Council members asked their attorney if THEY could PERSONALLY be held responsible and face any risk. He correctly said no. This is very sad.

Those cops know the same thing. They can screw with anyone, and face NOTHING!

Isn't typical for rewards/fines to go up for recurring instances of an infraction? Whether imposed by or on the state? Sounds like this time he should get a lot more than $10K.

 

[IanB]

imported post

I would force this to court (or maybe settle for an extra zero). But... I'd rather this go to court so it gets settled once and for all. This is really getting old reading about abuse in Norfolk.

 

[2a4all]

imported post

A single court verdict (in Dan's favor) won't likely put an end to this pattern of police behavior, because it won't get any (or very little) notice.

The City Manager basically makes all the decisions about cost/benefit, and reports to City Council.

The citizens of Norfolk need to raise a stink about such police tactics, and Dan's case(s) clearly show(s) a pattern. Individuals speaking out at Council meetings, LTEs, TV news reports, etc about this problem will get City Council's attention.

Dan should use FIOA to get the needed info, then call a TV station.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

da7f2q8 wrote:

A single court verdict (in Dan's favor) won't likely put an end to this pattern of police behavior, because it won't get any (or very little) notice.

The City Manager basically makes all the decisions about cost/benefit, and reports to City Council.

The citizens of Norfolk need to raise a stink about such police tactics, and Dan's case(s) clearly show(s) a pattern. Individuals speaking out at Council meetings, LTEs, TV news reports, etc about this problem will get City Council's attention.

Dan should use FIOA to get the needed info, then call a TV station.

There was one payout already.... but this was only to bypass the costly court system that would have cost the city more than $10,000 no matter what the outcome.

In this case.... Dan was detained... again!! But the question is.. was it justified and how would the people view the actions of the police??

As I recall.... itis the citizens that keep calling the police on Dan... not the police seeing him walk down the street!! Should they just let Dan go because he is openly armed? Possibly. But they have a duty and are paid to check things out when the people call. Sorry.... but being nosey is part of the job.

In this current event... Dan declined to show ID even though he is know by the police. Cooperation in this minor event will take you farther. Resistance will only get you detained longer. Remembering that the police did not just pick Dan out of the blue to stop. They are working a citizen complaint.

I suspect that even if people know OC is legal.... Dan is going to be reported. Was this due to the color of his skin? I have no clue but it was a same racecitizen who called to report him.

 

[SaltH2OHokie]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

da7f2q8 wrote:

A single court verdict (in Dan's favor) won't likely put an end to this pattern of police behavior, because it won't get any (or very little) notice.

The City Manager basically makes all the decisions about cost/benefit, and reports to City Council.

The citizens of Norfolk need to raise a stink about such police tactics, and Dan's case(s) clearly show(s) a pattern. Individuals speaking out at Council meetings, LTEs, TV news reports, etc about this problem will get City Council's attention.

Dan should use FIOA to get the needed info, then call a TV station.

There was one payout already.... but this was only to bypass the costly court system that would have cost the city more than $10,000 no matter what the outcome.

In this case.... Dan was detained... again!! But the question is.. was it justified and how would the people view the actions of the police??

As I recall.... itis the citizens that keep calling the police on Dan... not the police seeing him walk down the street!! Should they just let Dan go because he is openly armed? Possibly. But they have a duty and are paid to check things out when the people call. Sorry.... but being nosey is part of the job.

In this current event... Dan declined to show ID even though he is know by the police. Cooperation in this minor event will take you farther. Resistance will only get you detained longer. Remembering that the police did not just pick Dan out of the blue to stop. They are working a citizen complaint.

I suspect that even if people know OC is legal.... Dan is going to be reported. Was this due to the color of his skin? I have no clue but it was a same racecitizen who called to report him.

I don't understand the line of reasoning that would lead to him being asked for ID in the first place. If someone moved here from England and called the police because I was driving down the right-hand side of the road, I'd be more than a little perturbed to get pulled and asked for ID when the LEO knew full-well that driving down the right-hand side of the road was legal...

You wouldn't expect a LEO to actually respond to a call of "man driving down right-hand lane of street" would you? Why would they respond to call of "man with holstered gun riding a city bus"?

Maybe Norfolk is compelled to respond to all calls...if that's the case then maybe dispatchers need to be updated/educated as to Virginia's gun laws?

 

[cato]

imported post

Cynic wrote:

The CITY having to pay Dan $10,000 means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

Correct, this is like you paying out 0.02 to make a claim go away.

 

[no carry permit ?]

imported post

Personally I think NPD is a pretty racist bunch. I have only had one problem there ever (I travel there 6-7 times per year on business and have for 10 years), I was in a car with 3 black co-workers. The officers said we looked suspicious to be "out at that hour as a group". It was like 11:30 pm.

I bet if I walked around with a hat , WHITE GUY WITH A GUN, no one would bother me. Perhaps we should print up caps, I'm with the black man with a gun and test which hat results in a police response.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

SaltH2OHokie wrote:

I don't understand the line of reasoning that would lead to him being asked for ID in the first place. If someone moved here from England and called the police because I was driving down the right-hand side of the road, I'd be more than a little perturbed to get pulled and asked for ID when the LEO knew full-well that driving down the right-hand side of the road was legal...

You wouldn't expect a LEO to actually respond to a call of "man driving down right-hand lane of street" would you? Why would they respond to call of "man with holstered gun riding a city bus"?

Maybe Norfolk is compelled to respond to all calls...if that's the case then maybe dispatchers need to be updated/educated as to Virginia's gun laws?

You are comparing apples to oranges.... EVERYBODY drives on the right hand side of the road.

Not everybody carries a gun openly.

Every citizen pays taxes that go towards fire and police services. Many locations dispatch an officer if the caller demands it.

Sorry guys but the police are paid and expected to snoop around. If a citizen calls and wants something checked out.. he is expecting his tax dollars to go to work.

How many times have I read on this very board... "The police work for me! I pay their salary! They have to do what I say!"

The police simply cannot EVER win....

If they stop a traffic violation.... they are told to go catch some real criminals.

But if they sit in a parking lot waiting to be sent to a criminal complaintthey are reported for admonished by citizens for doing... nothing.

The area is not crawling with criminals and very few actually commit violations in front of the police.

Most often the citizens call and report the activity. The police respond and determine if there is a crime occurring.

So in Dan's case... They responded to a call made by a citizen who believed Dan was probably up to no good. They snooped around and determined he was not out to do evil.

But his refusal to show ID just prolonged the contact.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

no carry permit ? wrote:

Personally I think NPD is a pretty racist bunch. I have only had one problem there ever (I travel there 6-7 times per year on business and have for 10 years), I was in a car with 3 black co-workers. The officers said we looked suspicious to be "out at that hour as a group". It was like 11:30 pm.

I bet if I walked around with a hat , WHITE GUY WITH A GUN, no one would bother me. Perhaps we should print up caps, I'm with the black man with a gun and test which hat results in a police response.

I am not from the area and know nothing about the crime there.

Let me ask you this.... What type of crime happens there and is it like DC where there is a lot of black on black crime?

In DC... how quickly do you think citizens would call about a black man walking down the street with a gun versus someone who is white?

Big difference??? Hell yes!! Butthis is going to be a direct correlation on who is more likely to be committing the crimes. It really has nothing to do with being a racist. It is more about the law of averages.

If pit bulls are reported to kill kids all the time.... they are going to get a bad name simply by the negative exposure.

I have noticed that the news up in NOVA no longer reports race and only refers to gender. IN DC... is was always "A black male....." But they stopped doing this. Every morning the news would report one black male shooting another on the streets of DC overnight.

Andremember that a black citizen called the police on Dan. This is not the police spotting him on their own so I would hardly call them racists at this point.

I did not see anything out of the ordinary for the contact. They only wanted to know who Dan was and he was released. They could have done far worse if they wanted to.

 

[longwatch]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

But his refusal to show ID just prolonged the contact.

But the constitution does cover the right to be armed and unless there is some other reason that is justified in requesting an ID card.... I would have to submit that being armed alone is not enough.

Everyone is afforded the freedom to go about their day and not have to show ID unless they are suspected of a crime. Being legally armed simply is not a crime.

Possibly being a felon is a fishing expedition. Being underage is a possibility and the stop would then be justified if you can articulate the person was "obviously" under age.

If you don't stop contradicting yourself my brain will explode. First it was a fishing expedition, then it's Dan's fault for not IDing himself.