bobernet
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Las Vegas Metro PD has just rolled out a new mandatory training program for all POST officers (both regular metro and corrections). The training must be completed by November 1 for commissioned employees below the rank of Deputy Chief. The training is an elective for all other employees (administrative, dispatch, etc).
The purpose of the training is to familiarize officers with Nevada law regarding the legality of open carry, and to clarify the department's policy on the proper response to citizens exercising their second amendment rights.
I've reviewed the training material and scenarios, and feel that it is a fair and balanced view of the law.
The training gives officers 3 "what-if" scenarios to review, and highlights what is and is not reasonable articulable suspicion to perform a Terry stop. At more than one point, the training stresses that the open carry of a gun - in and of itself - is NOT cause for anything other than a consensual encounter.
It makes the point that random "registration" checks are not allowed, and that any articulable suspicion must be based on the totality of the circumstances. If the firearm is all you have, you don't have anything.
The three scenarios are:
Man with a gun call on the strip at night. (There are other factors besides the gun. Gang dress/paraphernalia, potential under-age drinking, perhaps "known" to the officer to be a prior felon, etc.)
Man with a gun call, walking his dog - walks through a resident's back yard. (Gun alone is not RAS, but wearing a stocking cap in hot weather, may have trespassed on the caller's property, etc may provide RAS for issues other than the firearm.)
Group with guns on Fremont Street Experience. This is a nearly textbook example of an OCDO gathering. It describes a group of people from 35-60yo, open carrying, but not engaging in any other suspicious or potentially illegal behavior.
In all three scenarios, the training discusses what peripheral issues may or may not create RAS/PC for a detention, but it continues to stress that the presence of an openly-carried firearm is not RAS alone.
It makes mention of groups potentially "baiting" the officers to see how they will respond. It specifically deals with civil rights violations. It also makes the point that criminals do not normally carry weapons openly in a holster.
All in all, I thought it was fair, accurate (with some minor points under review), and should be a big help in educating local LE personnel.
I believe OCDO was directly and indirectly a part of the impetus for this training, and I'm proud to say that rather than escalated harassment as we've seen in other parts of the country - our local LE leaders have stepped up by providing fair and balanced training to the officers on the street.
Kudos to LVMPD!
P.S. The training specifically cites the US vs. Ubiles decision that possession of a firearm alone is not RAS. http://openjurist.org/224/f3d/213/united-states-of-america-v-kahli-ubiles
Las Vegas Metro PD has just rolled out a new mandatory training program for all POST officers (both regular metro and corrections). The training must be completed by November 1 for commissioned employees below the rank of Deputy Chief. The training is an elective for all other employees (administrative, dispatch, etc).
The purpose of the training is to familiarize officers with Nevada law regarding the legality of open carry, and to clarify the department's policy on the proper response to citizens exercising their second amendment rights.
I've reviewed the training material and scenarios, and feel that it is a fair and balanced view of the law.
The training gives officers 3 "what-if" scenarios to review, and highlights what is and is not reasonable articulable suspicion to perform a Terry stop. At more than one point, the training stresses that the open carry of a gun - in and of itself - is NOT cause for anything other than a consensual encounter.
It makes the point that random "registration" checks are not allowed, and that any articulable suspicion must be based on the totality of the circumstances. If the firearm is all you have, you don't have anything.
The three scenarios are:
Man with a gun call on the strip at night. (There are other factors besides the gun. Gang dress/paraphernalia, potential under-age drinking, perhaps "known" to the officer to be a prior felon, etc.)
Man with a gun call, walking his dog - walks through a resident's back yard. (Gun alone is not RAS, but wearing a stocking cap in hot weather, may have trespassed on the caller's property, etc may provide RAS for issues other than the firearm.)
Group with guns on Fremont Street Experience. This is a nearly textbook example of an OCDO gathering. It describes a group of people from 35-60yo, open carrying, but not engaging in any other suspicious or potentially illegal behavior.
In all three scenarios, the training discusses what peripheral issues may or may not create RAS/PC for a detention, but it continues to stress that the presence of an openly-carried firearm is not RAS alone.
It makes mention of groups potentially "baiting" the officers to see how they will respond. It specifically deals with civil rights violations. It also makes the point that criminals do not normally carry weapons openly in a holster.
All in all, I thought it was fair, accurate (with some minor points under review), and should be a big help in educating local LE personnel.
I believe OCDO was directly and indirectly a part of the impetus for this training, and I'm proud to say that rather than escalated harassment as we've seen in other parts of the country - our local LE leaders have stepped up by providing fair and balanced training to the officers on the street.
Kudos to LVMPD!
P.S. The training specifically cites the US vs. Ubiles decision that possession of a firearm alone is not RAS. http://openjurist.org/224/f3d/213/united-states-of-america-v-kahli-ubiles