ixtow wrote:
Citizen wrote:
I understand and appreciate the desire for a "peaceful" approach. The police are supposed to be the good guys, after all.
But, if they don't already respect the 4th Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, I don't think polite discussion is going to change their mind. This isn't just about guns. Its about the 4th Amendment, which governs every encounter they have with a citizen while on the job. If they aren't respecting the 4A with OCers, it is by no means a stretch to think they are "loose" with the 4A during encounters with other citizens.
You don't owe them the effort, especially if they already lightly regard or disregard the 4A. Quite the contrary, it is they who owe you:
No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded, by the common law than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law. Terry v Ohio quoting Union Pacific v Botsford.
Read that again, word by word. No right. Held more sacred. More carefully guarded. Free fromall restraint and interference. Unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law.
Meaning, unless they know to dead moral certainty that OC is illegal, its hands off, buster, until you have verified the law one way or the other. Consensual encounter or observe from a distance only.
That the court in Terry picked that exact quote speaks volumes. There must be a few hundred quotes from which they could have selected. If they wanted, they could have picked something less forceful, something watered down. But they didn't. They picked that one. And inserted it into the very case the police will incorrectly apply whenthey illegallydetain you over your gun.
Now, with that said, some OCers did get results by contacting and educating the police. The OCers seemed to avert trouble with police. There is nothing terribly really wrong with theeducate-first approach.On the other hand, there have departments that had to be brow-beatenbefore they finally stopped.
Who knows, in your case it might work. Be ready if it doesn't.
Quite understood, we don't owe them an explanation for doing nothing wrong.
I would see this kind of letter as more of a "You have been warned, you have no excuse for crossing the line."
Wouldn't you rather do that with a piece of paper, than 6 cranked up JBTs with glocks and flashing lights??
Both of your points are VERY well taken.
Citizen, you are right on the money when you say we don't owe it to them, and I agree. There is NO REASON we should have to write a letter to the police department just to get them to respect our rights. They should KNOW the laws (even though they have "immunity"... god that's such a BS excuse to not know how to do your job...) whether we tell them what they are or not. Also, they should respect citizens' rights and only enforce to the extent of the law (after all that's what we pay them to do right?). However, they DO have Immunity from knowing the law, and they don't always respect citizens and their rights. So in order to better inform them and to mold our police force back into what it is supposed to be, I would like to try the peaceful approach for now and see if it works.To me, asimple letter to the departments is worth not having to file a lawsuit against anyone.
ixtow, that is the EXACT reason I want to do something like this. To keep from having that encounter where there are 8 police officers pointing their guns at me and throwing me to the ground/cuffing me... all for NO REASON other than they don't know the law or don't agree with my expressions.
Although,I hope to make it more of an underlying tone that says "I will take legal action against you if my rights are violated; you have been warned" but I still want it to be there. The biggest thing is I would rather have peaceful encounters with ALL the police officers I come across. By writing this letter to them, I'm hoping to encourage the sheriff/ chief / whateverto sit all of his officers down and MAKE SURE they know the law and what their limitations are. Plus this will give all of them a heads up that there are people that DO know the law and will be exercising their rights, so don't be alarmed if you see a guy walking through town with a holstered pistol, or get a call from a deranged citizen saying "OMG there is a guy with a gun walking down Virginia St.!!! No he's not holding it or waving it around or pointing/shooting at anyone, he just has it holstered and on his hip... But he has a GUN!"
...Plus there is the added benefit of the letter, and the "refresher course" the sheriff gives his deputies ALL being on record which I think would be handy in court, if thingshad to gothat way.
Edit: How about some Officers' perspectives on this letter? Anyone? I would like to get an opinion from "the other side" of this.