Encounter with Anti-CCW

[Steve in PA]

Just remember, the LEO's with the bad gun/law knowledge learned their false or inaccurate knowldge primarily before they became LEO's.

Their lack of knowledge was deepened while working as a LEO by others who brought their beliefs with them into the field.

There are plenty of non-LEO's who have bad or inaccurate info as far as guns and/or laws are concerned.

 

[sarduy]

you should NOT cary a gun, is bad...Dont do it.

HAHAHA... joking man,

i think CCW is the best thing you can do, there are a lot of bad people out there and if a CCW will protect my family or me in any way i will go wit CCW.

 

[Sans Authoritas]

Steve in PA wrote:

There are plenty of non-LEO's who have bad or inaccurate info as far as guns and/or laws are concerned.

A slight difference: your co-worker or buddy can't make your life a living hell if he's horribly ignorant about freedom restrictions/gun "laws" and you choose to ignore his lunatic beliefs.

-Sans Authoritas

 

[Hunter0924]

Nice job on your part.
You handled that very well.

 

[cowssurf]

Wow, "nobody needs to carry guns nowadays." That old cop is helping me a lot. I've been misinformed. I was under the impression that people were still getting raped, assaulted, robbed, and murdered. I didn't realize the police had stopped all violent crime from happening. Wow, that's really interesting. So when rapists go to jail, it was for raping a cop? And no one but cops get murdered or assaulted? This is really opening my eyes. The cops are really solving all crime problems, and I guess I will turn all my guns in to my local police department. Way to go cops, you've brought us world peace. The media is so horrible for not having reported this yet, though. Typical.

 

[RyanM]

Wow where do I begin with this? What part of the law enforcement field do you work in? I'd venture to say none because it is VERY MUCH a police officer's job to know the law.

Read it again, Sam.

I said beyond what is necessary to make arrests. As in, a police officer should know what activity has a high probability of being illegal, so they can make arrests. That does not include trying to interpret the law, or determining someone's innocence or guilt in a hypothetical situation, or giving legal advice. A police officer might correctly say, just as an example, "if I saw you snorting a white powder in a public place, I would arrest you on suspicion of use of illegal drugs." They could not correctly say, however, "snorting any white powder whatsoever is illegal, and you'd go to jail if caught." The alleged ex-sheriff in this case was definitely trying to do the latter, however.

 

[wideym]

Most people do not realize that LEOs are everywhere doing their jobs without ever being noticed, but it only takes one loudmouthed, elitist, LEO to convince someone all cops are just like him, because he is their first personal encounter.

Like my first platoon sgt told me "It takes ten ata boys to make up for one aw crap".

 

[chris in va]

I had the same run-in with a captain at the Jersey City PD when I had a question about transferring a J-frame from NJ to VA.

Almost the same exact conversation, a little friendlier though. "Only cops should have guns, they'll just get you hurt. We have extensive training, you don't. They're very dangerous and usually end up on the street anyway. I highly recommend you just turn it in to us."

He didn't like it one bit when I told him I have a CC permit in VA.

 

[evan price]

I will explain the "Why do *I* always find these guys?" comment: I lifted this post entirely from one I also put onto an OHIO ccw board today, on which I have detailed a couple of other encounters with LEOs over the previous two years that were similar:

A state trooper who treated me poorly, because I was not carrying a gun and thus did not notify I had a CCW (as state law says: You only have to notify when there is a gun!) and the guy told me that the law says I have to notify regardless and it is a felony charge if I don't, and he could lock me up RIGHT NOW if he wanted, when I tried to explain the law to him I got handled with "authority" if you know what that means...granted the side of the road is no place for a legal discussion but I keep the AG pamphlet right in my visor for this type of stuff- what it came down to was the officer basically told me he was right, and even if he was wrong I'd beat the rap but not the ride and the towing and impound fees. This guy was an obvious rookie... then 2 weeks later got pulled over in the same spot, same speed, different, much older officer, I went ahead and notified even without a gun (like the first trooper demanded) and he patiently explained the law says I did not need to since I didn't have a gun, but he appreciated the info anyway...he was amused by the story of the other trooper, and let me off with a warning.

Also ran into an off-duty LEO former co-worker and now former friend at a party who saw me carrying and proceeded to hassle me severly to the point that I am no longer friends with any of the people who threw the party.

Let me stress I am not a cop basher. I have good friends who are cops. I know the job they do and the conditions they do it in for little thanks and a lot of trouble and beaurocracy. I know cops who personally think CCW is a great thing that will help reduce crime.

This particular thing today just really turned my screws because he was (it seemed to me) deliberately trying to prevent a curious citizen from pursuing the possibility of getting a CCW by either gross misrepresentation of the law or outright lies in order to continue his personal desires.

I am also going to confess that I wish I had handled it as "cool" as what people say- it took a lot of willpower to not react any worse than I did and frankly we both started to get loud.

I just have this annoying streak where I can't keep my mouth shut sometimes in the face of stupidity. Which causes me trouble, I'm sure.

 

[Crunker1337]

Elitism angers me. You did really well for not cursing him out, though he apparently didn't return the favor, heh. All you should hope is that he gets a bigger headache than you over this.

 

[shooter429]

True

Not all LEO's are like the one above

But, sadly, I have seen it before-a lot-at home. I think law enforcement attracts certain personality types who might be prone to elitist attitudes, but ya gotta remember there's the academy and departmental quals n such, so some think they are the stuff. And you gotta remember they are paramilitary organizations with a certain level of bravado and machismo common. Again, not saying all or most but a fair number in my experience. Still I guess I'll forgive my family members for being "like that." LOL

JK

Lots of good cops out there. Don't let a few spoil your image.

BTW, have you thought about his offer. Do they take reserves in your area? Might truly be a good way to get to carry and give back to the community.

Shooter429

 

[2Lman]

Probably the most common violators are accountants, paralegals, notaries public, and people who formerly worked for an attorney. Many times what seems to them to be "common knowledge" or "just helping out a friend" in fact crosses the line into practice of law. For instance, many accountants who represent small businesses will "fill out some forms" to create a corporation. They are drafting legal documents, which requires a law license.

Oh don't forget most bureaucrats in state or federal offices think that it is OK for them to practice law as well.

Last I checked, lawyers go to school for a minimum of seven years, and are extensively tested in knowing the law (and still, some of them are idiots.) Most police have a minimum of a twelve week course to be an officer. It is kind of difficult to get too much law study, along with everything else that you have to know, in that amount of time.

And, on those Hybrid vehicles... just be very careful around the orange wires... the most important color on them.

 

[sacp81170a]

It is a police officers job to uphold the law, protect the peace, and arrest suspected lawbreakers.

It is not a police officers job to give legal opinions, nor are they qualified to do so.

The "unauthorized practice of law" (UPL) is prohibited in every state that I am aware of, either by statute, regulation, or court rule.

Strangely enough, I get asked legal questions all the time, even by casual acquaintances. They get a ticket and ask what they should do, or the "Is this legal/illegal", etc. It's gotten to the point that anytime something like that comes up I simply tell them I'm not allowed to give legal advice. If they ask what a specific statute says, I direct them to the Arkansas code annotated on the web or tell them to contact an attorney.

One of our other part time officers is a law professor at the U of A and he keeps us up to date on court decisions that affect our procedures. Our other resource is our prosecuting attorney. If I have any questions about how the law affects our procedure I ask him. Even attorneys and judges can get it wrong, however. If that weren't so we'd never have any cases overturned on appeal.

On a side note, I can see how idiots like this make people mistrust law enforcement officers. In the future I'm going to try to avoid the mistake of identifying myself as part of a group that really has very little cohesiveness. We're not all the same, we don't do things the same way simply because we work under different sets of law and precedent from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. My department, the tiny little subset of police that I work with from day to day, has a few people with what I consider to be misinformed attitudes. Not a single one of them would hesitate to cover my back on a shots fired call, just as they know I would cover theirs. Can any of you say the same about your co-workers?* Now you know why I tend to get offended when we're lumped into a group and bashed.

*(Active duty military and my fellow vets excepted, of course.)

 

[bloodedsky]

Yes, yes -- not all LEOs are bad.

But the few who are can literally destroy a person's life.

The few who are bad do a lot of very bad things, so it makes sense to be leery of the class as a whole: You never know which one you might run into.

 

[CryingWolf]

To OP,

Well at least you tried. I always find when I am in these situations I don't have the nut sack to say anything. In the end I am sure I would have just ignored the conversation for the most part and if the means presented itself I would have tried to give the curious individual the pamphlet.

"You concealed and carry ***holes think it's the g-d old west or something. Nobody needs to carry guns nowadays, I never had to shoot anybody in 32 years of law enforcement, I got people I locked up just coming out on parole and they were tough MFers and I don't carry a gun today. Have you ever once in your life had to draw your pistol?"

"Better to be armed and never need it than to be unarmed and need it."

 

[Thain]

sacp81170a, I wasn't intending to paint all LEOs with the same brush. The vast majority of LEOs I "met" through THR or similar forums have always been above board, nice folks.

But there will always be a certain degree of... prudent distrust... I think thats the best way to say it. There will always be a certain degree of prudent distrust on my part when I interact with a law enforcement agency.

You are empowered to detain me, search me, arrest me, seize my property. In order to do any of these things you are only required to meet the lowest burden of proof our legal system has: probable cause.

Now the vast majority, I personally beleive around 99%, of police have no interest in doing wrong by me. But there is that 1% out there that are willing to dump quadriplegics from wheelchairs or beatup 15-year old skateboarders... There is also the very real possibilty that one of the 99% might have a failure of judgement or just act on very bad orders. NOLA gun grab, wrongful arrests, coverign a fellow cop under investigation. It happens.

Because police have power over me, which I am happy to give them, and because sometimes that power is misued, I feel I must be cautious with you. Not rude, not disrespectful, not hostile... just cautious.

I'm not going to open my range bag, I'm not going to let you look in my garage, I'm not letting you open my trunk, and I'm not inviting you into my house... unless you can show me a warrant. (And after the search, you cna bet my lawyer will be double checking to make sure the warrant was valid.)

This doesn't me I don't respect you, but you do kinda work for me... the tax paying public. Don't think I'm tryign to soudn liek that rich guyyou just pulled over for runnign a stop sign. This isn't a "I'm a tax payer! Gimme yer badge number!" rant... But the police are meant to serve and protect the public, and their powers are limited by that same public that put them into office.

 

[scrat]

you handled it way better than i would have ever handeled it. if i were in that situation i would have had that old man on his hands and knees begging for forgiveness. i would have ate him up. 32 years of le does not do **** if you dont know the laws. As far as arresting someone just because of a ccw is just plain ignorance. Shows stupidity and lack of intelligence.


Ok i better stop. Now im getting all hot under the collar.

 

[IME]

Last I checked, lawyers go to school for a minimum of seven years, and are extensively tested in knowing the law (and still, some of them are idiots.) Most police have a minimum of a twelve week course to be an officer. It is kind of difficult to get too much law study, along with everything else that you have to know, in that amount of time.

I've been an attorney for twenty years. There are certain areas of the law that I am confident of my position when I give legal advice. These are the areas of the law that I practice daily and make every effort to be up to date on any changes to the law. There are other areas of the law that I flat out will not practice nor will I give legal advice on because I have little or no practical expertise in it. The law changes too quickly, sometimes in dramatic fashion, for anyone to rely on their memory. An AG opinion on the state of the law in 2006 may be invalidated by legislation passed in 2008.

While we can all argue about and condemn the attitude demonstrated by the ex LEO in the first post, for those who do not take away from it the awareness that keeping abreast of any and all changes to CCW laws (or any weapons laws for that matter) is a lifelong process and not just an end unto itself can we really say that your ignorance is any different than his except as to scale?

<><Peace

 

[Thain]

My issue with the cop in the OP is not ignorance, it is arrogance.

 

[Zundfolge]

IME (and others) make a good point.

The law is a complex, byzantine mess and I certainly am willing to forgive an officer for not knowing every statute.

My problem is with officers that have the attitude that "I don't care if I'm wrong, I'll still F you up boy!" [cartman]Respect Mah Authoritee[/cartman] its THAT attitude that more officers seem to have these days that drives more law abiding folk like myself to see treat all officers with Thain's "Prudent Distrust" (or even Disdain).

 

[torpid]

I too don't like the broad brush smearing that occurs with officers.
But this question isn't really fair:

My department, the tiny little subset of police that I work with from day to day, has a few people with what I consider to be misinformed attitudes. Not a single one of them would hesitate to cover my back on a shots fired call, just as they know I would cover theirs. Can any of you say the same about your co-workers?*

Yes, because you are a police officer, and of course you back up your own.
Nothing wrong with that at all, completely admirable. I'm sure it's a great thing to acknowledge, and of course it means a lot.

However, it's those "few people in your department with misinformed attitudes" interacting with those of us not in the "brotherhood" that is the issue. My coworkers simply can't take away someone's freedom based on prejudices, legal ignorance or ego issues, but your "bad apples" can. In your comparison, the reality that they'd put it on the line for you is moot when they might quite possibly do the opposite for any of us.

The fact is that they will back you up where the general public won't.
This reality naturally might allow one to overlook these "misinformed attitudes" as an unfortunate character flaw in a fellow officer, and in the grand scheme of things simply letting them slide instead of trying to educate them.

 

[Cesiumsponge]

Not a single one of them would hesitate to cover my back on a shots fired call, just as they know I would cover theirs. Can any of you say the same about your co-workers?* Now you know why I tend to get offended when we're lumped into a group and bashed.

No offense, but I also see botched raids and officers covering each other's backs in fabricating stories so they get out of trouble instead of taking responsibility. Sometimes these get exposed (Kathryn Johnson) and sometimes they never get discovered.

You can explain away a bad egg in any profession as no screening process is perfect. When you see entire groups of officers fabricating stories, it is much more serious a problem than a rogue bad egg.

 

[Sans Authoritas]

Torpid wrote:

Yes, because you are a police officer, and of course you back up your own....The fact is that they will back you up where the general public won't.

Aye. Even gang members know they "have each other's backs." It doesn't mean that what they do is justified.

Beside the police, show me any profession that has the power to forcibly detain you for "crimes" that are not a violation of the life, liberty or property of your neighbor, and I'll show you a profession that has lost its way as a whole. I don't care if they're ironworkers, lumberjacks, waiters or doctors: they can't do that. Cops are merely supposed to be the people whose job it is to protect said life, liberty and property: nothing more. Anything more has nothing to do with being a true policeman.

If your doctor started punching his patients out, you'd demand he be fired immediately. If your waiter spat on a tray of food, he'd be gone in a heartbeat. If a policeman, who is supposed to protect your rights, confiscates your peacefully owned firearm or arrests you for some other "infraction" not of the actual rights of other actual people, but an infraction of "the rules," "God's law," the power of the State, or some other asinine, contrived "crime," you praise him for doing a "difficult, dangerous, and thankless job." You'd better believe that violating people's rights on a daily basis is, and should be a thankless job! The fact is, no one has a right to violate other people's liberty. That includes cops who think they have a right to disarm a peaceful person who may have an "illegal" firearm, because 70 years ago, a bunch of power-hungry thugs in marble halls decided that you shouldn't own them, or who arrest someone for driving without a license plate, or ticket someone for not wearing a helmet on a bicycle. I don't care if you're "just doing your job" when you arrest someone for a technical firearm violation (not a violation of life or property.) The Gestapo was just doing its job of keeping the State safe, when it tortured people and "disappeared" German citizens. And if you think I am saying that all cops are like the Gestapo, grow up. Be intellectually honest. Follow the analogy I'm actually making.

Unless you are only protecting individuals by taking actual criminals off the street, 100% of the time, get a new job. Any other type of "police officer" does not deserve my respect, nor that of anyone else. I am not a safer person because people want to pretend government-funded policemen are the only thing that can keep we simple citizens from being set upon by baying packs of rapists, looters and murderers. Wake up. Observe the reality of the situation, don't just blurt out the groupthink catchphrases that make people feel good.

Lastly, a preventive measure: to say that my statements are "cop bashing" would be as asinine as saying, "I lie, cheat, swear, murder and rape as much as I can, and I am a Christian," or "You don't agree with the U.S. government's foreign policy because, in part, you think it is counterproductive, immoral, and dangerous. You must be a traitor who hates your neighbors and wants American children dead, blown apart by terrorists." To the first person who will say I am "bashing cops?" Like I said before: grow up. Wake up. Be intellectually honest. It's not part of a doctor's job to hurt his patients. It's not part of a waiter's job to spit on food. Nobody who deliberately commits sins without remorse can say he's striving to follow the teachings of Christ. Nobody who is a policeman should do anything but protect people from acts that imminently or directly violate the life, liberty and property of other individuals. As long as they continue to do anything beyond that, they are all "bad apples."

I'll say it once more, with feeling. A Christian isn't someone who wears a cross or a crucifix. It's someone who strives to follow the teachings of Christ. A cop isn't someone who wears a badge and carries a gun. It's someone whose profession it is to protect the lives, liberty and property of individual people from imminent or direct threats to said lives, liberty and property.

-Sans Authoritas

 

[mgregg85]

Sounds like the typical 'holier than thou' attitude that some LEOs get. (I'm not saying that all LEOs are like that but some have that 'my **** doesn't stink' attitude)

 

[langenc]

Cops are people just like anyone else and we all have varying opinions and viewpoints. This is from post #10...

The only difference between cops and non-cops is they get to arrest people for their opinion or what they believe the law shloud be-too often.