Nice response from LEO when i declared I had a firearm


PDA






Black92LX
July 18, 2005, 11:23 AM
Well last monday morning i woke up to the burglar alarm going off around 9:25am. Ran and turned it off grabbed the Sig and went downstairs to find out what set it off. According to the pad it was the basement (outside) door. The door coming up from the basement was still locked so i went out to see and sure enough the door was wide open. Went back inside (didn't feel like fooling with anyne) and heard some loud noises coming from outside so i grabbed the phone and the Sig was out of the holster. I looked out the window to see an LEO climbing to my back door. So i promptly placed the Sig on the table and greeted the officer. And immediatly informed him that the firearm was on the table. He asked if i didn't mind if he secured the firearm for the time being. Of course i agreed and he stuck it in his pants as he checked the basement. returned back upstairs and laid the gun on the table and said that's a nice sidearm you've got here. I said thank you sir. And they were on thier way.
Alarm must have scared off whoever opened the door because i know for a fact the door was locked down there before i went to bed.

I have heard stories about the comments folks have gotten when declaring he firearms to LEOs so i was plesantly surprised at the response.

If you enjoyed reading about "Nice response from LEO when i declared I had a firearm" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
middy
July 18, 2005, 11:28 AM
he stuck it in his pants
:what:

I would never stick strange gun in my pants!

dolanp
July 18, 2005, 11:28 AM
Maybe I'm having trouble with the continuity, but you are saying the LEOs were in your backyard just mere moments after you've checked the outside door and gone back inside?

Anyhow I'd consider a good LEO response to be not disarming you in your own home, but maybe that's just me.

Black92LX
July 18, 2005, 11:32 AM
i have quite the small backyard. i am sure it was a matter of timing the officer was probably on the other side of my garage where i could not here or see him from my proch where i was outside maybe 15 seconds just long enough to see that the basement door was open and chose to not run into someone outside.

dev_null
July 18, 2005, 12:08 PM
I'm still confused as to why the police were trying to break into your basement. :evil:

ny32182
July 18, 2005, 12:35 PM
Does your alarm call the cops automatically when it goes off?

That is the only reason I could think of for having the cops there that quickly after you came inside...

Sad to say it, but otherwise, I'd be quite suspicious that it was the cop who was trying to break into my basement. :confused:

CAS700850
July 18, 2005, 12:48 PM
Or, another option, is that the police were chasing someone, who tried to break into Black's basement to hide-out.

And, as for holding onto the Sig for a couple of moments, do you trust someone you don't know at all to hold a loaded gun behind you? Especially if there is the possibility that there may be the surprise discovery of a subject, or even a gunshot?

bakert
July 18, 2005, 12:49 PM
Not sure about Ohio laws. I know they're much different and stricter than here in Ky but with me having a concealed carry permit I would damned sure mind him securing my gun in my own home.

Black92LX
July 18, 2005, 01:02 PM
Does your alarm call the cops automatically when it goes off?

Something was wrong with my landline that morning. The alarm company called the house and it went straight to the answering service (strange) so they sent officers.

GhostRider66
July 18, 2005, 01:13 PM
I would never stick strange gun in my pants!

Good advice for the young and old. (and not just with firearms)

centac
July 18, 2005, 01:22 PM
Uh, how are the cops gonna know who the legitimate resident is until they've done a little checking? Darn straight the gun gets secured until we know who's who, but that's just me, a JBT and all..........

thereisnospoon
July 18, 2005, 01:25 PM
Tsk! Tsk! Tsk! Such language...

1911_sfca
July 18, 2005, 01:31 PM
Wow, you guys are paranoid. Kudos to the cops for quick response, and glad that he was friendly about the gun. He absolutely did the right thing by securing the firearm, and OP did the right thing by letting him.

Jay Kominek
July 18, 2005, 01:38 PM
He probably saw the Sig and decided he'd rather clear a house with a fine weapon like that than the Glock he was probably issued. :neener:
Anyhow I'd consider a good LEO response to be not disarming you in your own home, but maybe that's just me. I wouldn't mind letting the fellow take my pistol in that circumstance. It was obviously time to retrieve the rifle from the bedroom, after all.
I would never stick a strange gun in my pants! Also, that is the best line I've seen on THR in a long time.

Black92LX
July 18, 2005, 01:57 PM
He probably saw the Sig and decided he'd rather clear a house with a fine weapon like that than the Glock he was probably issued.
Cincinnati officers are issued Smith & Wessons.

I did not have a problem with him securing the weapon. i would/will do the same thing.

Andrew Rothman
July 18, 2005, 02:06 PM
I've had three law enforcement officer encounters while carrying (fender-bender and speeding tickets, I'm sorry to say). Minnesota's carry law is brand new, yet none of them asked me to disarm.

I'd be unhappy but compliant if a LEO asked me to disarm in my own home.

carebear
July 18, 2005, 02:30 PM
If they want to secure that one, fine, I got more. If he wants to stick them all in his pants, well....

He's gonna need a bigger belt. :evil:

TheFederalistWeasel
July 18, 2005, 02:40 PM
Geeeeeeesh......

"We the willing, led by the knowning are doing the impossible for the ungrateful..."

Guess it's true, no matter what we do, no matter how we do it or how well our intentions some will find fault in all we do, for some strange reason.

:(

buzz_knox
July 18, 2005, 02:49 PM
Guess it's true, no matter what we do, no matter how we do it or how well our intentions some will find fault in all we do, for some strange reason.

Consider it an indoctrinated response. We've been taught by our own experiences or the experiences of others to expect the worst.

dev_null
July 18, 2005, 03:32 PM
What exactly did it accomplish to take his pistol away, albeit temporarily? I ask not as flamebait, but to understand the goal and determine if it was attained. If the idea was to make the officer feel safer, then perhaps it did so, but it's a false security since the homeowner was not searched and could just as easily had three more like it on his person. So just what was accomplished?

buzz_knox
July 18, 2005, 03:38 PM
What exactly did it accomplish to take his pistol away, albeit temporarily? I ask not as flamebait, but to understand the goal and determine if it was attained. If the idea was to make the officer feel safer, then perhaps it did so, but it's a false security since the homeowner was not searched and could just as easily had three more like it on his person. So just what was accomplished?

The argument is that it's for officer safety, as he doesn't know (1) if the person standing there is actually the homeowner or a burglar posing as the owner and (2) even if that is the owner, how is he going to react if he hears a noise (i.e. the owner gets scared and might shoot the officer). As you imply, it's a feel good measure posing as a standard procedure. If the issue really were officer safety, you'd see the person searched and removed under restraints . . . just in case.

Of course, the officer has now removed the homeowner's ability to protect himself, thus subjecting the officer and the department to liability if anything happens to the homeowner during the duration.

buzz_knox
July 18, 2005, 03:40 PM
By the way, same situation happened at a friend's place a while back. His alarm goes on and, as per our LFI and YFA training, he got the kiddies in the secure area and bunkered down. The cops arrived and searched the premises.

The difference is that these good ole boys never thought to have him disarm, which he wouldn't have done in any event. "Disarm? No way. Thank you for your time but you can go now."

CAS700850
July 18, 2005, 03:40 PM
It was for the officer's peace of mind, officer safety, etc. Many officers I know support RKBA, private ownership, etc. And, I have headr from several of them about coming into contact with armed citizens while conducting an investigation. In each case, they either personally secured the weapon, or watched as the citizen secured it. The reason, as so well explained by a firearms instructor, is that he has no idead of the skill level of the person he's dealing with. Safest assumption to make is that the owner is incompetent, so securing the weapon avoids a problem.

Best armed citizen story: murder victim's father was reputed to have purchased a .300 Win Mag rifle, complete with bipod and scope. In other words, a nice rifle for long range precision shooting, like maybe taking out the guy who raped and killed his 14 year old daughter while he's being transported to the courthouse. On the chief's orders, the lead detectives go talk to him, tell himn the rumor, and he confirms it. Says the rifle is in the closet over there. They ask if they can secure it until the trial is over. He agrees. No problem. They open the closet, and find the gun case, along with another 15 or 20 other rifles, shotguns, and handguns.

They left the rifle... ;)

GhostRider66
July 18, 2005, 04:06 PM
In each case, they either personally secured the weapon, or watched as the citizen secured it. The reason, as so well explained by a firearms instructor, is that he has no idead of the skill level of the person he's dealing with. Safest assumption to make is that the owner is incompetent, so securing the weapon avoids a problem.

Interestingly enough, I have the same opinion of most officers I meet. No offense intended but my next door neighbor is a FWPD officer. One day, he came over and was checking out some of the gear and I was quite surprised when he couldn't identify or properly handle a single one. He explained that the only weapons he had ever fired were his service pistol and shotgun and he only ever did that as required for qualification and the practice that was required for it. He also revealed that most of his co-workers had about the same level of experience. I might wind up getting shot one day, but I've made the commitment to clearing any weapon prior to handing it over to an officer when requested. Otherwise, I might get shot anyway.

buzz_knox
July 18, 2005, 04:10 PM
Interestingly enough, I have the same opinion of most officers I meet.

I won't go that far. I've seen cops who were highly capable and competent but others I wouldn't trust to be anywhere around firearms.

RevDisk
July 18, 2005, 04:15 PM
Uh. While yes, I think I can understand the officer not wanting to be shot by the homeowner while searching the house himself... He was there approx 15 seconds after the alarm went off? :confused:

Or did the alarm company sent the police, and the officer in question attempted to enter the property via the basement? :scrutiny:


I could understand the police not trusting the homeowner, because of reasons already cited here.

Uh, one question... Did he know you or ask you for identification? Because if not, he saw an armed person in the house and then turned his back on said person. If a person has one gun, I'm gonna assume they have more until I KNOW otherwise. I'd make sure that person was supposed to be lawfully in that house also.


I realize this might sound like chest-beating or cop bashing, but I don't know the level of training and experience of any police officer. I'm going to either clear the house myself, or leave the house until he's done clearing it and then clear it again myself. Why? It's my bloody house, not his. I am a lot more likely to know all the hiding spots better than the officer. He may or may not having the training I have, but he sure as all heck doesn't know the house like I would.

CAS700850
July 18, 2005, 04:16 PM
Same instructor has also told me that he'd like to disarm several officers, but the cheif and the union won't let him, since they pass the qualifications. :rolleyes:

migoi
July 18, 2005, 04:16 PM
Thinking about this situation transposed over my current living conditions brings to mind a few thoughts....

I probably would not have informed the LEO of the presence of my firearm. The report, as I understand it, concerned unexpected/unexplained noises outside. No need for the LEO to enter my home. No legal duty for me to inform the officer absent a direct question.

If the LEO had discovered the presence of my firearm and had requested temporary custody for his safety I would have complied without complaint or comment.

As soon as the LEO went back outside to investigate the noise source, I would have immediately rearmed myself for my safety. If the noise source turns out to be an actual BG who manages to overwhelm the LEO (the LEO is not always the winner is such encounters, sad to say) then the BG would be armed with not one but two firearms and I would want to be evening things up a bit for when the BG decides to return his effforts to his first intended victim....me.

Overall the LEO's actions in this encounter sounds like a rote response that did little to enhance LEO safety while doing much to reduce the safety of the citizen the LEO has sworn to protect and serve.

migoi

buzz_knox
July 18, 2005, 04:20 PM
Overall the LEO's actions in this encounter sounds like a rote response that did little to enhance LEO safety while doing much to reduce the safety of the citizen the LEO has sworn to protect and serve.

Bingo. As with most rote responses, the failure to adapt the general rule to the specific situation causes a suboptimal response. If the LEO really thought someone might be in the basement, the first thing to do is to get any innocents to a place of safety rather than disarming them and leaving them in the zone of potential danger.

roo_ster
July 18, 2005, 04:22 PM
Gotta like that response time. The weapon securing does seem to be more a "feel-good" measure than anything else in the absence of a search of Black92LX.

If'n such an incident were to happen at Chateau Ruser, it is likely that my SW1911 would be secured under a cover garment by the time Johny Law entered my tiny abode.

Even if it was secured by Johnny Law (Mexican style with a C&L 1911 :eek: ), I'd just go back to the bedroom and rearm with my .357 snubbie and be sure my wife had the Kel-Tec P32 handy.

MikeIsaj
July 18, 2005, 04:33 PM
Let's see, your here in MY house to investigate a suspicion that an intruder has broken in and may still be in the house. And you want me to disarm? This is my house and if you are uncomfortable with my being armed in this situation, you may go now!

Wouldn't it have been safer for both the LEO and the homeowner, to ask you to go outside and wait for them to clear the house?

jcoiii
July 18, 2005, 04:43 PM
Mike, yes. safer for you. Not necessarily for the officer as he/she does not know you.

That being said, if I answered this call and the "homeowner" meets me, I'm going to ID him first thing, while asking him to stay away from the gun for the moment. Once I know it's the owner,no prob. "Please secure your weapon for the time being." But that's me, obviously not the guy who responded.

larry_minn
July 18, 2005, 04:56 PM
So the Officer wants to stick MY Glock down his pants while I hold the shotgun or AR (whichever wife does not have)...... Too bad the dept won't give him a good gun so he has to borrow one?
IF things are bad enough that I will wait for Police to get here. I WILL remain armed until they have checked for intruders. OF course they will have to come thru house to get to where I (hope) to be holed up with wife so mute point.

centac
July 18, 2005, 05:04 PM
"I've seen cops who were highly capable and competent but others I wouldn't trust to be anywhere around firearms."


Funny, one could say the same about civilians........

buzz_knox
July 18, 2005, 05:07 PM
Funny, one could say the same about civilians........

Funny, I thought cops were civilians.

Vernal45
July 18, 2005, 05:11 PM
Funny, I thought cops were civilians.

They are, unless some legislation has been passed to put them under the UCMJ. But, then again, some cops think they are not civilians.

pax
July 18, 2005, 05:16 PM
And that's enough.

We're not going to have yet another (tiresome, annoying, and boring) cop-bashing thread on my watch.

pax

If you enjoyed reading about "Nice response from LEO when i declared I had a firearm" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!