regarding the fourth amendment

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hopefully thats the only laws I need to keep on me.

In the early days of open carry here in WA, I carried around the training bulletins and laws. I stopped when I realized that absolutely nothing I could say or show them would change anything. The police are never going to let you educate them on the law; they simply won’t surrender control of a situation to allow it. They almost always know the law anyway, and are merely trying to intimidate or humiliate you into compliance.

“Officer, am I being detained? No? Have a nice day.”
 
We pretty much also have to carry concealed with a permit, so a person with a permit who was OC'ing could probably be charged with Disorderly Conduct in that a complaint by someone about the gun could be considered "with intent to cause alarm" and that the person was engaging in "threatening behavior". That's a misdemeanor and can be an "under arrest" charge.

I've seen that charge used for that reason and while the court may have dismissed or "nolled" the charges, to the best of my knowledge, the courts have never said it was an improper arrest.

I'm not attacking you so don't take it that way when I say:

Pretty much? I'm not sure what the law states there, but if you have a permit you can either open carry or you can't. If it is legal, then they can't arrest you for causing alarm(??). If it is legal to OC, then unless you pull/draw the weapon, you are not brandishing or "causing alarm"....is that an actual law btw? Just curious. STill, they can't arrest you for doing something legal just because someone is alarmed by it.


You are right about the op's circumstance needing to be clarified since a cop can see something that he may consider PC.

If the PC that the cop is using is the fact that a person is oc'ing, and it is legal to oc, then the cop is wrong. Otherwise people would be detained or arrested all day long for not breaking the law.
 
The law here is if you can lawfully possess a firearm, you can OC. No permits or anything necessary other than valid handgun registration.

The circumstance im referring to in my OP was that the cop detained you for OC'ing. I was wanting to know what the cop COULD say to try to cover himself if his detention was in fact illegal and a violation of your 4a rights.

I carried around the training bulletins and laws. I stopped when I realized that absolutely nothing I could say or show them would change anything

If something did come out of me being detained illegally, like me being arrested, if I have the laws ON HAND, I believe that might show the court that I knew what I was doing and that it was indeed legal. It certainly wouldn't hurt, would it?

And so im clear, If I am indeed being detained, what information do I have to give the officer?
 
BhmBill said:
No permits or anything necessary other than valid handgun registration.

Ack! That made me throw up in my mouth a little. You have handgun registration?

BhmBill said:
If something did come out of me being detained illegally, like me being arrested, if I have the laws ON HAND, I believe that might show the court that I knew what I was doing and that it was indeed legal. It certainly wouldn't hurt, would it?

I would hope that if it actually came to you standing in front of a judge (a very remote possibility) that you would have a lawyer doing all your talking for you.

BhmBill said:
And so im clear, If I am indeed being detained, what information do I have to give the officer?

First, are you being detained? Ask the officer.

If he says no or refuses to answer, then you are not being detained. Either walk away, or if you’re still feeling unsure, ask, “Am I free to leave?”

If he says yes, that you are being detained, than ask him, “For suspicion of what crime are you detaining me?” The law requires he be able to articulate a specific crime he suspects you are involved in (The law does not require him to answer your question though). If you are being detained, provide only what the law requires and not one iota more. I cannot tell you what you should do, but I will tell you what I have done and what I intend to do in the future.

I was walking near the Museum of Glass in downtown Tacoma, one of the security people must have called the police because as I came around the corner there were several walking briskly towards me with security in tow. The officer who spoke to me was the same one who had told me several months previously that if he ever saw me openly carrying again that he would take the gun and leave it to me to get it back from a judge. He began by saying that he wasn’t going to take my gun (duh) and asking for my CPL. I pointed out that I wasn’t carrying a concealed weapon and declined to give it to him. He asked me again to see my CPL and I asked if I was being detained (should have asked that first). He said no, but if I would just give him my CPL that I could leave. I pointed out to him that I was already free to leave (since I wasn’t being detained) and that seemed to stump him a little. He then claimed he just wanted to check it for me to make sure it wasn’t expired. Beware of cops who suddenly want to do you a favor. His sergeant called him over, they spoke for about 30 seconds, and the sergeant wished me a nice day.

So, the short answer is to give the officer nothing more than you are required by law to give. Don’t engage him in a conversation, don’t try to teach him anything, don’t try to be his buddy. They have a lot of tools in their toolbox. They can use intimidation, they can suddenly be an old friend you haven’t seen since high school, they can try to humiliate you in a public setting, or any combination. If your state’s laws say you have to provide ID whenever it is requested by LE, then do so. If the law doesn’t require you to provide ID, then don’t.
 
Sadly, yes. I actually just got back from registering my newest revolver (S&W 58-1 .357).

Of course id have a lawyer doin my talkin.

I was reading the Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, and apparently, you have to properly identify yourself if asked and reasonable suspicion exists that you committed a crime. If I read it correctly, probable cause is not grounds to identify yourself. Thus, if you are illegally detained, I believe you'd have to identify yourself according to NRS 199.280

NRS 199.280 Resisting public officer. A person who, in any case or under any circumstances not otherwise specially provided for, willfully resists, delays or obstructs a public officer in discharging or attempting to discharge any legal duty of his office shall be punished:

1. Where a dangerous weapon is used in the course of such resistance, obstruction or delay, for a category D felony as provided in NRS 193.130.

2. Where no dangerous weapon is used in the course of such resistance, obstruction or delay, for a misdemeanor.

[1911 C&P § 97; RL § 6362; NCL § 10046]—(NRS A 1967, 466; 1979, 1422; 1995, 1176)

Therefore, If you are illegally detained, you would not have to identify yourself, but if you were in fact legally detained, you'd have to identify yourself.

So if I understand this correctly...

The police get a call that a short skinny white male wearing a red shirt is beating a woman and has a gun outside of a 7-11. I'm walking by, a tall fat white male wearing a blue shirt while OC'ing, and the police show up and ask me to identify myself, I respond with "Am I being detained?", they tell me I am and ask for identification again, at this point, legally, I would not have to identify myself since they don't have reasonable suspicion that I had committed a crime because I do not match the suspects description.

Am I right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top