Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Calif. police claim a visible firearm is enough to detain a person for...

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by NavyLCDR, Mar 25, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. NavyLCDR

    NavyLCDR member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,691
    Location:
    Stanwood, WA
    Calif. police claim a visible firearm is enough to detain a person for...
    concealing a firearm! :scrutiny:

    http://sfpublicdefender.org/media/2010/03/jury-acquits-honor-student-gun-charge/

    At least there are 12 people in San Francisco with some common sense.
     
  2. dovedescending

    dovedescending Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    575
    Location:
    NW Georgia
    LAME
    the LEO took pictures AFTER moving the gun and handling it... what a waste of taxpayer money, both on his salary and the trial.
     
  3. IdahoLT1

    IdahoLT1 Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2008
    Messages:
    825
    Location:
    Boise, Idaho
    No counter suit? I'd totally support this guy in a counter suit. It may help him get through college.
     
  4. ozarkgunner

    ozarkgunner Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Messages:
    250
    Another example of LEO, good or bad, iver stepping their bounds and hasseling innocent law abiding citizens. For "good" LEO's on this site, this isn't badgering all LE, just the bad ones like these ones.
    Asside for even making an arrest for some thing that wasn't illegal, or even coming close, they addmitied to evidence tampering. This guy gets put thru the ringer, will have his future possibly harmed, and more. And I bet no disaplinary action will be taken against the officers.
     
  5. jnyork

    jnyork Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    912
    Location:
    Arizona and Wyoming
    Hard to believe our side actually won one in San Francisco. Whole thing was a sham and travesty.
     
  6. wishin

    wishin Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,430
    Location:
    Georgia
    Damned if you do, damned if you don't! Sounds like California.
     
  7. rtroha

    rtroha Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2006
    Messages:
    304
    Location:
    Ohio
    There have been at least two similar situations in Ohio.

    About a year ago, a young man was arrested by Cleveland police for CCW while openly carrying a gun in a military-style flap holster. The young man chose to enter a diversion program rather then fight the CCW charge.

    Recently. a man was arrested for CCW when Warren police saw him carrying Mexican style. The article writer mistakenly used the term "holstered" but there was no holster.

    http://www.tribtoday.com/page/content.detail/id/534681.html
     
  8. Owen Sparks

    Owen Sparks member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    Messages:
    4,524
    What about other Constitutionally protected items?

    Can they arrest you for carrying a visible Bible or newspaper? After all, the pen is mightier than the sword and these contain many dangerous ideas that MIGHT prompt you to break some law.
     
  9. NavyLCDR

    NavyLCDR member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,691
    Location:
    Stanwood, WA
    AAAAAAAAAGH! :cuss: :banghead: :fire:
     
  10. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,096
    He is just lucky the officers didn't invent other probable cause, which does happen. Or his entire defense would have been ruined.

    Had they said something like "smelled odor of marijuana", or "in a high drug trafficking area", or "suspicious in area with high gang activity" or "patted something and believed to be instinctively feeling for his weapon" or one of the similar blanket excuses often used instead of honestly saying they saw the openly carried firearm his defense would have faltered.

    Essentially if the officers had made up any other reason for probable cause except for seeing an openly carried firearm they could have claimed they found the concealed firearm afterwards. Which would have made his defense much more difficult.

    Had he lost his case he would have become a prohibited person in California.


    Officers are also free to stop anyone to check if the gun is loaded under California law per the penal code. So they can harass people legally carrying an unloaded firearm each time they see them without any additional probable cause.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2010
  11. KBintheSLC

    KBintheSLC Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    3,197
    Location:
    Stalingrad, USA
    This is great news... aside from the wasted tax dollars of course. Many of us are hoping to build up enough momentum to push for "shall issue" and reciprocity laws soon. Even though this case has nothing to do with CCW permits, the fact that a CA jury actually sided with the gun owner is a giant leap in the right direction.

    Sad but true. And a lot of the cops in CA do these scandalous things with frightening regularity (especially in cities like SF). This is the price we pay for having our KGB liberal mafia state... the cops are not defenders of society, they are defenders of the elite.
     
  12. denfoote

    denfoote Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,622
    Location:
    Near the border of occupied Azlan and Mexico.
    This is an example of why Yuma Arizona is gonna be the new sea coast!!!!!

    This level of stupidity must eventually be terminally painful!!!

    Nature abhors stupid, it's called natural selection!!
     
  13. Zip7

    Zip7 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    390
    Location:
    The South
    It's really illegal to carry a loaded gun in your car in California? Geez! How do they get away with those drive by shootings then?
     
  14. jnyork

    jnyork Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    912
    Location:
    Arizona and Wyoming
    It has started already, for several years now we have had a large influx of California residents moving here, not only into Yuma but throughout Arizona and other western states as well.
     
  15. SharpsDressedMan

    SharpsDressedMan member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    5,957
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    Common sense is not common. Perhaps they should include a psych test for common sense to further screen SF police officers.
     
  16. Gouranga

    Gouranga Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2010
    Messages:
    928
    Location:
    Gaston County, NC
    Wait a second. Did that article from Ohio state he was wearing a gun in plain...in front of...children who were playing? Dear God!! Will the madness ever end!?

    If that is not an attempt by the media to totally (and in as lame a manner as possible), to paint open carry advocates in an extremely negative light I do not know what is. That is almost the exact way they describe a perv flashing people.
     
  17. ArfinGreebly

    ArfinGreebly Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    11,691
    Location:
    North Idaho
    Wait . . . What?

    :scrutiny:

    Oh, gawd.

    :neener:

    I . . . just . . . can't . . .

     
  18. Bear 45/70

    Bear 45/70 member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    109
    Location:
    Union, Washighton
    One of these days The Peoples Republic of Kalfornia will be forced to rejoin the United States of America. Until then I just refuse to go there for any reason.
     
  19. Officers'Wife

    Officers'Wife Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    3,073
    Location:
    A long way from heaven and too close to Chicago
    Hi SharpsDressedMan,

    In California? Sounds like a job for a latter day Diogenes.
     
  20. Steve C

    Steve C Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,702
    A lawyer who had many successful concealed carry cases told me that any case where the police claim to have seen a concealed weapon is very easy case to win. He said the same thing as the lawyer in the article, concealed means "not visible" so you can't "see" a concealed weapon. He said a good concealed weapons charge is ancillary to another legitimate reason to search an individual and they happen to find a weapon by a method other than viewing it.
     
  21. Webbj0219

    Webbj0219 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    300
    Location:
    Manchester, NH
    Ive read how our first president George Washington carried a dress sword on his person at all times, when he was out. That would just be ..... If our president open carried a dress pistol when he went out in public. Not sure how the perception in this country has gotten so that carrying a weopon in public all in itself makes you evil. Our first prez was a General and the sword was part of his dress attire. So he wore that same attire as president. I guess America has become more civilized since then? Nowadays you have to worry about having the police called on you if your open carrying. And potentially getting CC charges if your holster isnt deemed proper. Like you were really trying to hide it. Had someone mention that to me while OCing my S&W 442. Its a small gun and I have a small holster, Im not trying to conceal it. If I wanted to do that I would just put it in my pocket, it would be much easier.
     
  22. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,096
    Which is why all they have to do is approach them, and do a terry frisk, which requires no probable cause per our SCOTUS, and then "discover" the concealed weapon they could see all along.
    At which point they can write it up as coming across a concealed weapon while doing a routine terry frisk for officer safety.

    Officers abuse the "terry frisk" to discover drugs and other things all the time when actually doing it for that purpose is illegal. They may know someone clearly does not have a weapon in a tiny little pocket, or in their skin tight clothing, but they are going to check it anyways to "accidentally" stumble across contraband during their permitted terry frisk.
    They have even done a "terry frisk" in some cases on people legally carrying a loaded firearm (either openly where legal, or with a concealed permit) everyone knows about to look for contraband.
    Clearly a joke in that case because the guy has an obvious lethal weapon on him known to everyone, but the officer is going to use the pretense of making sure he has no dangerous weapons (purpose of the Terry frisk) to explore what is in his pockets?


    The "terry frisk" is routinely used in California and other places to explore the contents of pockets when probable cause does not exist. If they then "stumble" across contraband they write it up as an accident. Or they can retroactively create probable cause. Like saying they smelled marijuana if they find marijuana. Or saw symptoms of some narcotic if they find narcotics. It may be untrue, but it is routine and nobody in a court of law is going to know any better.
     
  23. Bear 45/70

    Bear 45/70 member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    109
    Location:
    Union, Washighton
    You are wrong on several counts. First the cop must have "articulable reason " to do a Terry stop and if he doesn't the the cop is violating the law. Second, carrying an unconcealed weapon in a holster, or at least not in your hand, is not even reason for a Terry stop. Why are you giving cops powers they do not have?
     
  24. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,096
    They are powers they use all the time. They harass teenagers with it everyday (as teenagers, are responsible for a lot of certain types of crime.)
    Who are being "suspicious" or "loitering" or other regular things teens do when just hanging out with friends.
    Teenagers (or parents on their behalf) don't sue over minor things very often either so make ripe targets of abuse.
    The burden of proof for a terry is almost non-existant and any officer can create a reason on the spot for anyone. Unlike probable cause.

    They are a little slower to harass adults, but if they really want to do a terry they can create a reason. It does not even require probable cause and if they know it will result in a charge (like a concealed weapon charge from a weapon they can plainly see) they will proceed.

    Maybe your area is different, but in many areas I have lived, especially in California, and most especially in lower income areas (which incidentally are the high gang and crime areas) , they do these things regularly.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2010
  25. Bear 45/70

    Bear 45/70 member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    109
    Location:
    Union, Washighton
    If they are doing it they are breaking the law and need to be stopped. Cops are not omnipotent and do not possess those powers. Oh and they would never get away with it with any of my kids or me. If you let them do it, you are not much of a citizen or a parent if let them get away with it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page