Dumb move

[brimst0ne13]

actually come to think of it, yea leo's dont tell you to get out and move to the rear for speeding. were you driving a stolen vehicle? lol

 

[protias]

You need to read these two books:

http://www.amazon.com/Legal-Minds-D...TF8&coliid=I3TMMJKY9L9AEQ&colid=2TDVPZXV53DTZ

http://www.amazon.com/Cop-Out-Enfor...UTF8&coliid=ILO7N44PFSR0U&colid=2TDVPZXV53DTZ

 

[nonzenze]

As a matter of both courtesy and common sense, I have always notified LEOs immediately upon contact that I'm carrying a loaded firearm (although I'm CCW, not OC). Just a simple and polite "Before we go any further, you should know that I'm carrying".

In all instances, the police have responded courteously and professionally to this statement (and thanked me for being forthright). Some fraction will ask to hold the gun while conducting their stop, others won't -- all are far less likely to be alarmed if you tell them than if they find out themselves.

 

[nonzenze]

personally i woulda complied while asking him "On what grounds are you pointing your weapon at me and ordering me to the ground? A holstered and legal sidearm? A HOLSTERED and LEGAL sidearm? Really? Think about it Cpl. Quickdraw."

Probable cause that an individual has committed a crime. If an officer sees you committing an offense (like speeding or failing to wear a seatbelt) he is entitled to arrest, detain and disarm you. In fact, he can cuff you and bring you into the station (see here). Suggesting that, as an alternative to a full custodial arrest, he cannot detain and disarm is utterly bizarre.

Not that he was correct, mind you, but it is undoubtedly within an LEOs power to effect an arrest. He should exercise his power judiciously (and most do, how often does someone get a full custodial arrest for speeding anyway -- he sounds like a jerk) but playing cowboy lawyer, especially when you are wrong, is hardly advisable.

 

[protias]

As a matter of both courtesy and common sense, I have always notified LEOs immediately upon contact that I'm carrying a loaded firearm (although I'm CCW, not OC). Just a simple and polite "Before we go any further, you should know that I'm carrying".

In all instances, the police have responded courteously and professionally to this statement (and thanked me for being forthright). Some fraction will ask to hold the gun while conducting their stop, others won't -- all are far less likely to be alarmed if you tell them than if they find out themselves.

Unfortunately that doesn't always work. I have been courteous with police and was responded with, "We believe you to impersonating us."

Probable cause that an individual has committed a crime. If an officer sees you committing an offense (like speeding or failing to wear a seatbelt) he is entitled to arrest, detain and disarm you. In fact, he can cuff you and bring you into the station (see here). Suggesting that, as an alternative to a full custodial arrest, he cannot detain and disarm is utterly bizarre.

Not that he was correct, mind you, but it is undoubtedly within an LEOs power to effect an arrest. He should exercise his power judiciously (and most do, how often does someone get a full custodial arrest for speeding anyway -- he sounds like a jerk) but playing cowboy lawyer, especially when you are wrong, is hardly advisable.

Seems to be working out "real" well for a few places in WI. NOT! Police agencies who have arrested or harassed lawful carriers have been sued/protested.

 

[eye95]

Detention and arrest may be appropriate. However, the objection was on being drawn upon. That was unwarranted in the described situation. I hope in that jurisdiction is is also unlawful, given the circumstances.

 

[HeroHog]

I think there are a lot of missing details here. Speeding a few miles over, does not warrant, what sounds to me like a felony stop. Smells fishy

I have been stopped for being 4 miles over the limit. No long hair, no bad driving (on an interstate with the cruise control on), no tinted windows, NOTHING other than going 69 in a 65. I can easily buy this.

 

[protias]

I think there are a lot of missing details here. Speeding a few miles over, does not warrant, what sounds to me like a felony stop. Smells fishy

Yes it does. Officer doing some fishing!

 

[nonzenze]

Detention and arrest may be appropriate. However, the objection was on being drawn upon. That was unwarranted in the described situation. I hope in that jurisdiction is is also unlawful, given the circumstances.

As a matter of common sense, it was probably unwarranted.

As a matter of whether the show of force was unreasonable as a matter of law, I don't think there's a single court in the country that would rule that an officer with PC to make an arrest cannot draw on an armed suspect to effect his arrest/detention.

 

[nonzenze]

Unfortunately that doesn't always work. I have been courteous with police and was responded with, "We believe you to impersonating us."

That's quite unfortunate. Still, as a matter of common sense, I would still always advise an LEO stopping me that I'm carrying. For my own safety and because I believe in not letting a situation get out of hand.

Seems to be working out "real" well for a few places in WI. NOT! Police agencies who have arrested or harassed lawful carriers have been sued/protested.

The arrest here would be for speeding, not for carrying. In order to effect that arrest, the officer has the right to draw on the suspect, disarm him, cuff him and put him in the cruiser. Lucky for our OP, he decided to stop at #2 instead of taking a drive down to the station.

There's absolutely no excuse for the WI cops that arrest or even disarm suspects without PC to believe that they have committed an offense. That's not the same as here, where the officer had (by stipulation) PC.

See how those scenarios are different in an important way?

 

[eye95]

As a matter of common sense, it was probably unwarranted.

As a matter of whether the show of force was unreasonable as a matter of law, I don't think there's a single court in the country that would rule that an officer with PC to make an arrest cannot draw on an armed suspect to effect his arrest/detention.

Actually pointing the weapon at a person with a properly holstered firearm who is following the officer's instructions is an unwarranted assault. Drawing the weapon and keeping it pointed in a safe direction would not be unreasonable.

IMO, the officer assaulted the detainee without sufficient justification.

 

[Kirbinator]

personally i woulda complied while asking him "On what grounds are you pointing your weapon at me and ordering me to the ground? A holstered and legal sidearm? A HOLSTERED and LEGAL sidearm? Really? Think about it Cpl. Quickdraw."

That's fine and dandy, while you have your hands at your head... IF he's on camera. If not, he won't think about it until DAYS after, if ever.

He just wants to go home at the end of the shift too.

 

[OldCurlyWolf]

That's quite unfortunate. Still, as a matter of common sense, I would still always advise an LEO stopping me that I'm carrying. For my own safety and because I believe in not letting a situation get out of hand.



The arrest here would be for speeding, not for carrying. In order to effect that arrest, the officer has the right to draw on the suspect, disarm him, cuff him and put him in the cruiser. Lucky for our OP, he decided to stop at #2 instead of taking a drive down to the station.

There's absolutely no excuse for the WI cops that arrest or even disarm suspects without PC to believe that they have committed an offense. That's not the same as here, where the officer had (by stipulation) PC.

See how those scenarios are different in an important way?

I am not sure how the WI statutes read, but further south, speeding alone is not an arrestable offense unless you are a driver from another state. Reckless driving, in excess of 15mph over the speed limit, is an arrestable offense.

You do not do a felony stop unless you have some other reason than speeding to pull someone over.

As Mr. Kowalski posted: Something smells fishy. Either the original post by Vmaxrider left out something or he might have been dealing with an officer who had some problems.

:cuss:

 

[since9]

As a matter of both courtesy and common sense, I have always notified LEOs immediately upon contact that I'm carrying a loaded firearm (although I'm CCW, not OC). Just a simple and polite "Before we go any further, you should know that I'm carrying".

In all instances, the police have responded courteously and professionally to this statement (and thanked me for being forthright). Some fraction will ask to hold the gun while conducting their stop, others won't -- all are far less likely to be alarmed if you tell them than if they find out themselves.

That's been my experience. Sort of difficult to do, however, when the LEO is directing you to vacate your vehicle via his bullhorn.

I'd have complied fully with the LEO's instructions, then afterwards I'd have complained like hell all the way up and down his chain of command, starting with Internal Affairs.

 

[Darkshadow62988]

From what I can find, speeding <15 mph over in WI is a civil violation, not a crime. I'm not sure, but I think that means it's not an offense an officer can arrest on alone. This would mean the officer's action were not completely within the law. I am unfamiliar with WI law though, so I may be wrong.

 

[bobzilla]

It's also helpful to think of it from the officer's point of view, put yourself in an officers shoes. Police officers want to be able to go home to their family every night just as you and I do. As stated earlier in this thread, a person who is drawn down upon a person with a holstered weapon has the upper hand, because if the other person decides to try to fire upon the officer, by the time the person gets his weapon out of his holster, the officer will be able to fire and protect himself.

If the officer would leave his firearm in his holster every time he saw a gun that is properly holstered and legal, that officer would be at a severe disadvantage if that person decides to draw his weapon upon the officer.

It is important to remember that not all OCers are law abiding citizens like most of us on these forums, and the mere fact that a person is a LEO makes them a target for armed criminals. The officer doesn't know if you are a criminal or not.

Officers, and sometimes armed citizens in distress, often need to make split second decisions that are a matter of life and death. That split second decision to draw down might have saved that officers life is you were a criminal that wanted to shoot cops. If you were that officer, you would want to do everything in your power to ensure your safety. So I believe that the officer was justified in drawing down on you to maintain the upper hand in case you turned out to be a criminal with a taste for cop blood.

Best thing to remember is that the officer just wants to end his shift safely and go home alive and well, just as you and I.

I am only politely offering my opinion on the subject and have no ill-intentions with this post. I am an OC'er myself and fully support OC, however I also support Police Officers being able to go home to their families.

Woah, quite the first post eh?

 

[eye95]

You ignore a couple of things:

1. The officer can gain advantage without actually pointing a gun at the LAC.

2. OCers are almost exclusively LACs! BGs don't OC. They operate in two modes: CC and brandish.

I appreciate the officers' need to feel safe, but drawing down was an incredible overreaction. By the time the he noticed the gun, the LAC had already complied with some of his orders, giving no indication that he he was likely to draw. Even if the officer felt the need to "get the drop" on the LAC, he could have drawn his weapon, taken the safety off, and pointed the muzzle in a safe direction. He can take cover and call for backup.

Pointing the loaded gun at the LAC was an unwarranted assault that feeds the (generally) unwarranted mistrust and hatred of officers that is rampant in communities like this one.

Welcome to the site.

 

[protias]

It's also helpful to think of it from the officer's point of view, put yourself in an officers shoes. Police officers want to be able to go home to their family every night just as you and I do. As stated earlier in this thread, a person who is drawn down upon a person with a holstered weapon has the upper hand, because if the other person decides to try to fire upon the officer, by the time the person gets his weapon out of his holster, the officer will be able to fire and protect himself.

If the officer would leave his firearm in his holster every time he saw a gun that is properly holstered and legal, that officer would be at a severe disadvantage if that person decides to draw his weapon upon the officer.

It is important to remember that not all OCers are law abiding citizens like most of us on these forums, and the mere fact that a person is a LEO makes them a target for armed criminals. The officer doesn't know if you are a criminal or not.

Officers, and sometimes armed citizens in distress, often need to make split second decisions that are a matter of life and death. That split second decision to draw down might have saved that officers life is you were a criminal that wanted to shoot cops. If you were that officer, you would want to do everything in your power to ensure your safety. So I believe that the officer was justified in drawing down on you to maintain the upper hand in case you turned out to be a criminal with a taste for cop blood.

Best thing to remember is that the officer just wants to end his shift safely and go home alive and well, just as you and I.

I am only politely offering my opinion on the subject and have no ill-intentions with this post. I am an OC'er myself and fully support OC, however I also support Police Officers being able to go home to their families.

Woah, quite the first post eh?

Welcome to OCDO.

A couple of things. Law abiding citizen (and criminals for that matter) want to go home at night.

How do you drawn down on someone with a holstered firearm? Once you draw, that firearm is no longer holstered.

How is a holstered firearm a threat to anyone? Inanimate objects cannot just jump out and start shooting. Criminals never OC. Please show me one that does and I will retract my statement.

Many times someone who OC is not a target. In fact, someone who OC prevents crime without knowing it! http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-atlanta/open-carry-deters-armed-robbery-kennesaw

 

[jsimmons]

How do you drawn down on someone with a holstered firearm? Once you draw, that firearm is no longer holstered.

He was talking about drawing your gun on someone that has a holstered gun. English is sometimes a very imprecise language, and you have to read a bit more carefully.

How is a holstered firearm a threat to anyone?

Because it's, well, a gun. It doesn't surprise me at all that a cop wants his 'suspects" unarmed during an interview.

Criminals never OC. Please show me one that does and I will retract my statement.

But they used to in the wild west.

 

[Grapeshot]

If the officer would leave his firearm in his holster every time he saw a gun that is properly holstered and legal, that officer would be at a severe disadvantage if that person decides to draw his weapon upon the officer.

If there is no RAS or more precisely NO THREAT then the officer should not draw his gun. You allow that the sight of a gun is a threat - I don't think so!