Entertainment for the night...

[Sweden]

Something else I thought of; it cost the City of Denver plenty in legal fees to keep their ban on open carry. The suburbs don't want to fight that fight over again (they don't have the "home rule" claim Denver used).

The suburbs probably only have those ordinances on the books because they haven't been challenged yet.

While I agree, anytime your best defense is you expected the local gendarmerie would have better tolerated your illicite behavior rather than.......well, pressing the issue

 

[poor_richard]

i think someone forgot to read the post about their call originating with a citizen call. and has confused the word reasonable with articuable

If your referring to my post, there is no confusion.

MWAG call= Man With A Gun call, so I addressed it in my post.

An anonymous call does not constitute RS. Period. The officer MUST be able to articulate Reasonable Suspicion that a crime is afoot, in order to detain an individual. That’s the law. Where carrying a gun is legal, it (the gun, as well as a MWAG call) does not (in and of itself) equate to reasonable suspicion because carrying a gun is not a crime. It can be used in conjunction with other indicators. Whether or not you, or anyone else thinks that a MWAG call should be RS is irrelevant, because the law says it isn’t.

Furthermore, The citizen call is irrelevant in the context of the opening post because the officers stated that their RS was “officer safety”. In this case, even IF a MWAG call was allowable as RS, it wouldn’t matter because the officers stated that their RS was “officer safety”, not the call, or the gun itself. That is why it’s a good idea to get the officer to state his RS up front. Had they found an illegal knife on the OP, then the officers would either have to lie about their RS (because they’d have to change their story), or the whole thing would be thrown out on improper RS. It is also a good reason why these officers should not be engaging in such behavior, as it would be a shame for a real criminal to go free just because they failed to observe the proper rules and conduct for such stops.

Ask Surat (or any officer) if their local prosecutor would be happy with them using “officer safety” for RS or PC to detain or arrest someone, which then turned into a major bust. I’m sure they’ll say that they are allowed to do a Terry Frisk for weapons under the umbrella of “officer safety”, but I’ll be surprised if they say it’s allowable as RS.

Like I said, if your referring to me, there is no confusion on my part. That isn't to say that I don't make mistakes, but the confusion between reasonable and articulate is not one of them, Yet.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

what makes you imagine the call was anonymous? and what part of the officers actions do you believe falls outside terry?

 

[poor_richard]

what makes you imagine the call was anonymous? and what part of the officers actions do you believe falls outside terry?

Doesn't matter. They gave "officer safety" as their RS, not the gun, or the call. Of course, I doubt that that part of it will make it into the report (I even find it hard to believe that it's true, but I'm going in context of the opening post). I'm sure they'll put something else in there report as their RS to detain him.

However, I'll address your question anyway. If the complaint was not anonymous, then (I believe) that person may file a complaint against the OP (doubt it would go anywhere). Then, I suppose the officers would be obligated to "investigate". That doesn't mean that they have RS to detain him (not sure on that part, but I doubt they would as again, they need RS that a crime is afoot, not an offended individual). Just one more reason to politely and respectfully ask the officer for his RS, and then politely decline answering any questions, while asking to be released.

As for the context of the Terry Stop did you even read my post (#173)?

I clearly stated:

Your right in a sense. During a detentment, they do have an obligation to officer safety, and may do a Terry Frisk for weapons (which should be immediately returned upon/if the contact is broken).

Oops, missed a spelling error. Have to go back and edit.

Anyway, I believe I was clear in that they could seize his weapons (Terry Frisk). My point wasn't that they couldn't search for weapons, but that the stated RS was bogus.

Truth is, I could be wrong, or someone else could be wrong. Either way, it's something to let the court sort out. If the officer acted properly, then they have nothing to worry about as far as legal action from the OP. If they acted improperly, then they deserve anything the OP can throw at them.

 

[PTK]

Somebody mentioned getting a letter from WalMart corporate stating that this is not company policy. Then waltz back in, look for the manager, and ask him if he remembers telling you you weren't allowed in any WalMart ever again. Then ask what he's gonna do about it. Be sure to allow at least 3 of the 8 concealed weapons to be exposed. Make sure you've got the letter.

I know where your screenname comes from now.

 

[Sweden]

So, from what Sweden cites, if you carry CONCEALED, then the gun must REMAIN CONCEALED AT ALL TIMES!

Not really, what's on the books say it's town by town wrt open carry in colorado, never been challenged, so it hasn't been legistalted as being "of statewide concern".........yet.

 

[Surat]

Surat wrote:


Quote:
As for the first half, what is unreasonable about an officer handcuffing an unknown armed subject when investigating a "man with a gun call" before disarming and ascertaining their status?

By your own words, you've already determined that when you respond to a "man with a gun" call that the "man with a gun" is going to be a threat. You seem to have forgotten that many of us are on YOUR side.

And how am I supposed to know that you are a good guy? Because you tell me?

Quote:
To add suspicion, the subject is found with three firearms and accompanying ammo and until the weapons are removed off his person, fails to state he has a permit. To the posters who are screaming constitutional rights violations, think about this. . .

I'm thinking this is the guy I want on MY side in case of a problem, not a guy I want to annoy unnecessarily.

I shouldn't have to worry about annoying him. Once. Again. How do I know he's a good guy? Becasue he has a CCW Permit badge?

As long as I conduct myself with professionalism and stay within the bounds of law and department policy I am 100% covered and 100% right. I believe where the conflict arises is with your incomplete understanding the legal issues at hand.

Quote:
As a cop and member of the jackbooted oppressor class,

I really hate to say it, but "You got that right!" Please read my words carefully and take them to heart. Maybe you're not too burned-out to change.

And what pray tell are you exactly trying to say? All guns are good, therefore all people who carry guns are good? What should I change? By the way, burned out cops are the ones that stop doing their jobs and hide in alleys. Too much TV and Hollywood portrays it the other way.[/QUOTE]

Quote:
I personally like to go home at the end of my shift.

If that's your expectation, you're in the wrong line of work. You sound too smart for running around in a cruiser investigating "barking dogs". Have you considered the Detective's Exam?

I like patrol. The only thing I want out of this job is a chance to run a dog. Other then that I'll keep my happy ass in a patrol car wher it belongs. I take the good with the bad. It doesn't mean I like the bad, just that I put on my "happy face" when dealing with it. Apparantly, by your words, you suffer from the same delusion that all law enforcement officers are mental pigmys and this was the only job they could get after getting a degree in Phys Ed or dropping out of High School.

Quote:
If I find a subject that I have been sent to find as a "man with a gun call" I'm NOT going to ask him or her to reach into their pockets to produce a permit or ID. The first thing I'm going to do is secure said hands to ensure that they don't pull out a gun and shoot me. The next thing I am going to do find said gun and secure it. The next thing I'm going to do is figure out what is going on.

Are you saying there's something wrong with *asking* somebody for their carry permit before you've cuffed them, secured them, and secured their weapons?

It depends on the situation. In North Carolina you are legally obliged to tell a LEO that you are carrying when you are on your permit. It's a misdemeanor not to. First offense is citation with mandatory court date.

Do you make people get out of their cars, cuff and secure them, and boot their cars *before* you ask to see their license and registration? No? Why not? Isn't poor operation of a motor vehicle an issue of life and death public safety? What's the difference in threat level? Won't a bad car wreck kill you just as dead as a bullet? So what's your problem that you have to violate somebody's rights simply because they might possess a firearm?

No, but the person in the traffic stop is expressly told to stay in their car. If they get out they get put back in. If they continue to approach they get drawn on. I am always the first one out and the last one in. When I appoach, I keep in the small area of protection offered by the B pillar because it make it harder to shoot me.

Do you make people get out of their cars, cuff and secure them, and boot their cars *before* you ask to see their license and registration?

Apples and oranges. Cars don't generally run you over when you stand next to them. Hands pull out weapons in tenths of seconds. In some cases, like a felony stop (say a car comes back stolen) f_ck yes they get proned out and cuffed before we get better introduced. There's been more then one car owner that forgot to report he had found his stolen car and gotten a rude full out felony stop out of it.

It's that attitude of "us vs them" that you've unfortunately picked up.

Yes, I do. Us is the guys in blue that I depend on and spend more time with then my family. Them is everyone else. That includes upright citizens, criminals, generally everyone else that I don't personally know nad can vouch for. The list of people I can persnally vouch for is pretty limited. Once again, just becasue someone says they are on the side of the angels does not mean they are.n "They" generally have a poor understanding of law, police operations, and at times reality. After all these years my wife is just now understanding. I've been married to her for 10 years and she's been a soldier or cops wife the whole time.

Quote:
As for the second half, I see far too many people in my department, slack with firearms safety.

I'm sorry to hear that. But just becasue your fellow cops are dangerous with guns, doesn't mean us civilians are, too.

Yes, it does. Once again, unless I personally know you, I'm not going to assume anything. If so called trained professionals can make mistakes, the so called ametures can too. How an I suppsoed to know if you are Jeff Cooper or a mall ninja? I have a simple rule, don't point that thing at me or I'll ask if you want me to point mine back. LEO, civilian, no differance. I've seen too much stupidity at ranges to think otherwise. In general, people are unsafe. If they weren't the ER wouldn't be full of patients. My off duty is at the local ER, so I know whereof I speak.


Quote:
Lastly, I feel like a dilettante. I carry a Kel-tec .380 in the summer with a spare mag and a S&W five screw with a Bianchi speed strip in the winter.

Back-ups, or off-duty?

Off, I carry enough on my hips at work. Vest and gear weighs about 30 lbs. Be damned if I'm going to torture myself when off. I know that most would consider the above marginal but I don't make a habit of telling people what I do for a living.

Duty: Glock 23 & spare mags, 2 sets of cuffs, taser, radio, streamlight, gloves, baton, nextel, lockblade in pocket. Enough that after 12 hrs, half the days of the year I want to run light.

Quote:
Great, I can see you have no clue how law enforcement operations work. Every single call is answered. BS or not.

And this is a Good Thing.

Mostly agreed, although I sometmes wonderjust why exactly some people don't suffocate when they are not told to breath in and out.

Quote:
Someone stated to the effect “All the officers had to do was ask for PTK to produce a permit and leave.”

Yup. Then your valuable time (and apparently that of 11 other officers!) could be better spent preventing *real* crimes.

OK, more lessons on law enforcement. Cops do not catch criminals by driving around in cars, looking for some guy that looks like the Hamburgler with a sack of loot. We do it by making contact with as many people as possible. It's basically being nosey. I am paid to be nosey. Contact, contact, contact. Traffic stops, checks on suspicious persons, license check points, knock and talks. That's how you serve warrants, that's how you get dope, that's how you get thugs and thier illegal street guns off the streets so that the thugs don't hold up mom and dad's store. If you are lucky the Feds pick mup the case and you can ship one of these turds off for some serious time or you finaly get them stuck for a habitual felon. Should I do less (investigating) on a suspicious person/man with a gun call then on any other type of call?

Quote:
OK, I tell you what, you volunteer to be the cop to ask that.

Not a chance! I thank you for your service, but I'm certainly not crazy enough to want to be a cop.

Thanks, I think. . . but how can you realisticly tell me what I should or shouldn't do. I don't tell my dentist how to fix teeth. I don't tell my barber how to cut hair. Believe me, after 7 years sworn and another 4 of military police time, I'm fairly decent with it. I know people think my job is so easy but, once again, I see a real lack of volunteers stepping up. Could there be mroe to it then running around in blue polyester and driving a car? Hmmm. Could it be alot of practical knowlege on Criminal Law, Constitutional Law, Civil Law, Invstigative Proceedure, evidence handeling, etc etc etc?

Look at it this way. It takes 4 to 6 months of rookie school jsut to meet the minimum standards so that you can receve another three months of field training. So it takes at minimum 7 to 9 months to become a full fledged rookie that realizes he knows practically nothing.

And what's crazy about it? Am I crazy for wanting to be active and try to make my community better? Am I crazy for putting my body in harms way for what I believe in, the rule of law over the rule of might? Am I crazy fo wanting to stand before my creator on the end of days and say "I tried to live the best I could and make the world a little better."?

Quote:
Is he gonna pull out a permit or a .S&W .500 and blow your head off? How do you know this is a honest god fearing upright member of the community? Because he “looks ok”? Pray tell, answer that. If he pulls out a gun but I beat him on the draw, now I have to shoot him and I really don't wanna go through that.

Why don't you just "shoot first and ask questions later"?
Hazards of your line of work. Just be glad your'e not in Iraq!
Again, don't violate my rights for your safety/comfort.

Hazards of my work, so. . my life is worth less than anothers because I choose to do my job? The job Robert Peel described as "The police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence."

If people would spend more time giving attention to the welfare of their community instead of beating their chests in histronics we might not be in such crap straights as a society

How do you know where I've been or haven't been? Now that it's been metioned, no I haven't been to Iraq. After my time. I was in during the Klinton years, policing third world pis__oles. Bosnia turned out OK, but Somalia was a waste of time and don't even get me started on Haiti.

Why don't you just "shoot first and ask questions later"?

Illogical and ad hominim.

Quote:
How do I know that the permit he produces is still valid?

Here in VA, they have expiration dates, and have to be carried with a valid photo ID. How do you know the photo ID is valid? Or not stolen? Gee, spotting fake IDs is part of policework, no? And if everything appears OK to the best of your abilities, you let him go about his business. It's that simple.

OK, OP is from Colorado. I have no idea how they work there. I'm in NC. I do know that a NC CCW has to be accompanied by a valid ID. A CCW can be revoked by the Sheriff at any time. How am I to know if it is still valid? How? I check with NCIC.

You seem to be laboring under the assmption that a LEO can't seized you if you "haven't done anything illegal". No, you can be seized if reasonable suspicion exists. Read the definition of Reasonable Suspicion. Wikipedia is good enough. . .emphasis is mine.

Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard in United States law that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts and inferences. It is the basis for an investigatory or Terry stop by the police and requires less evidence than probable cause, the legal requirement for arrests and warrants. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the "reasonable person" or "reasonable officer" standard, in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably believe a person has been, is, or is about to be, engaged in criminal activity; such suspicion is not a mere hunch. Police may also, based solely on reasonable suspicion of a threat to safety, frisk a suspect for weapons, but not for contraband like drugs. A combination of particular facts, even if each is individually innocuous, can form the basis of reasonable suspicion.


If I got a call for a man with a gun, how is it not reasonable to assume that the guy matching the description is armed? If I find said weapon, how is it unreasonable to secure this individual until I figure out just what I have.

This is not some new creation of the courts but a long standing legal precident.

Quote:
Now I have the guy, who I know is armed but maybe his permit is revoked. . . now I have to effect and arrest of an armed subject.

If his permit APPEARS revoked (and I dunno how you would tell without instant database access),

It's called a MDT and it's in my car and available with the radio but it still requires me to send and recieve the requst for this information and I'm not going to be able to do that worrying if mr mystery man is going to shoot me.

To reiterate, as the OP said, he never infomed the officers he was carrying under a CCW permit.

then you still ought to consider that he may not *know* that it has been revoked. Could be a clerical error. He probably had a clean record up to the point of issuance (that "clerical error" works both ways!).

Oh, ok, I'm supposed to just believe this guy because he told me he didn't know? Gee officer I didn't know I was speeding. Gee officer, I didn't know I had crack in my pocket. Gee officer, I didn't know I had that warrant. Gee officer, I didn't know I was over the legal limit.

Quote:
Another aside. To most cops, except maybe newb rookies, criminals lie or evade, while honest people tell the truth. Simple fact. When you refuse to speak with an officer in a open forthright manner on the grounds that "his investigating is violating you god given rights", then you are acting like a suspect. If you get treated like a suspect, don't be surprised.

"If they weren't guilty, they wouldn't be suspects!" Spoken like a true cop.
The point is to do your job the *right* way, even if it sucks to have to do it that way.

As I have told many an irate victim, when you enforce the law you are bound by it. Unfotunately, once again, you appear to have an incomplete grasp of arrest search and seizure and how "we" apply it. Read the book by Robert Farb if you want to tell me how to enforce law here or in general.

http://www.sog.unc.edu/about/directory/farb.html
http://www.amazon.com/Arrest-Search-Investigation-North-Carolina/dp/1560112212
http://law.onecle.com/constitution/amendment-04/13-stop-and-frisk.html

Tell me, what is the right way to do my job?

Quote:
As for the inevitable wise elbow that crackd off "where are your papers" etc.,I hope that was a joke because you so don't wanna go there.

Darn right we don't want to go there! "Never Again". The only way to keep from "going there" is to vehemently fight every step in that direction.

Have any family that suffered at the hands of the Nazi's, which I assume you are refering to? I had a great grandfather that spent time in Nazi prison for having copies of the Communist Manifesto in the attic. Kind of humorous now. My great-grand uncle got drafted and blown to bits somewhere in Poland. Slightly less humorous becasue I'd have liked to have met the man.

But II'm guessing you'd welcome it, since it would make your job a little easier...

ad hominim.

Quote:
Gotten so much as a cell phone contract without a social security number?

Yup, and when asked I've told them that they had neither reason nor right to ask for it.

Quote:
Let me know how well you can write a check without your government issued ID (driver's licence).

Some of us don't write checks, for this very reason. Cash and money orders for everything.

Quote:
Ever had your print's taken for a job application or the like? Don't even get me started on AFIS.

As an owner and individual manufacturer of several NFA firearms, I've been thoroughly and repeatedly fingerprinted. I guess BATFE expects my fingerprints to be DIFFERENT on the next application, otherwise they're just wasting our tax dollars by asking for them over and over again.

Use your social on that application?

Quote:
Been in the military and had your DNA collected (mouth swab)?

Military service effectively erases any individual rights.

I'm out now, wanna bet my DNA is still on file?

Having served my contract out, I still have relinquished my rights?? ?huh?

Use a debit card?

Yeah, all the time - over the phone, online, or to buy gasoline. Funny how I don't need a photo ID, govt-issued or not, to do so.

Did you have to show ID when you set up the account? Try setting up so much as a passbook savings account without valid ID. The point I'm making is that Social Secuirity numbers and OLN's are integral to every day buisiness. You already have "papers" and you can dang well bet the IRS wants you to have them in order. If you are in the AFIS database you have you "papers" on the ends of your fingers.

DMV files and a phone book are really good investigative tools. Post office is a close second along with the Register of Deeds. I don't need your "papers", which is what I was trying to say in the first place. Your "papers" are all out there already. So much is public information it's scary. What's not public is easly obtained with a subpeona or a warrant.

You wanna be pedantic and pick apart what I have to say, fine. I enjoy a good discussion. Ad hominim attacks are NOT THR as far as I've ever been led to believe and I don't appreciate it. Please don't infer nasty things about me and I won't infer nasty things about you.:banghead:

 

[poor_richard]

I know where your screenname comes from now.

Are you talking to me?

 

[Surat]

Poor Richard

How is "officer safety" BS?

How is the above search and seizure of the OP unconstitutional and outside terry v ohio? Because the officers found out nothing illlegal happened even though there was reasonable articulable suspicion and concerns for officer safety?

http://law.onecle.com/constitution/amendment-04/13-stop-and-frisk.html

 

[poor_richard]

Poor Richard

How is "officer safety" BS?

Sorry, I don't understand the question.

 

[OMGWTFBBQ]

Twelve officers to check out a CCWer buying art supplies at wally world... WHY?!?! Are they really THAT new to dealing with people carrying concealed that they can't handle it with a little more tact?

Either someone got mighty creative on the phone or the local LE lack common sense... or both...

 

[Surat]

ok, nevermind. . . Going backto the OP's OP we have this to parse:

Anyway, I was handcuffed and my weapons were removed, ID/CCW checked, etc. I was then brought to the WM security office while waiting for the clear from my ID and CCW being checked (yes, it was all clear, I don't break laws). All this time, I'm sitting there in handcuffs (my back hurts) and asking "Am I under arrest?" to which the response was "No, you're being detained for our safety."

My SO said I must've asked "Am I free to go, officers?" about half a dozen times.

Poor Richard, I think I misread what you posted and now I understand.

The "No, you're being detained for our safety."is not a valid reason for a seizure of a person, however the officer stating this may have been misheard or the remark misconstrued by the OP. The officer that stated this may very well be an idiot. Be that as it may, as far as I can see from the circumstances (detention for safety remarks aside) this was a valid terry stop. As soon as the reasonable suspicion dissapeared the subjects were released.

Once the clear ID and CCW came back, and the guns weren't listed as stolen, they "oh so kindly" escorted me (sans weapons) out to my truck where two officers talked to me for a bit.

One basically said it was major BS for this to have happened, as I wasn't breaking any laws.

 

[PTK]

poor_richard

No, I was talking to Arrogant Bastard.

 

[poor_richard]

Poor Richard, I think I misread what you posted and now I understand.

Good, I was starting to wonder. Glad were on the same page now .

The "No, you're being detained for our safety."is not a valid reason for a seizure of a person, …

Exactly, that’s been my point all along.

…however the officer stating this may have been misheard or the remark misconstrued by the OP.

Reread my first paragraph in post #179.

The officer that stated this may very well be an idiot. Be that as it may, as far as I can see from the circumstances (detention for safety remarks aside) this was a valid terry stop. As soon as the reasonable suspicion dissapeared the subjects were released.

That‘s just it. What, exactly, is that “reasonable suspicion“? I know that neither of us can say without full knowledge of the circumstances, but so far all we have to go with for RS is, “officer safety“, and we both know that‘s bogus.

Be that as it may, as far as I can see from the circumstances (detention for safety remarks aside) this was a valid terry stop

So, if it’s a valid Terry Stop in your eyes, then what is the RS? What crime are you reasonably articulating a suspicion of to believe that it’s a valid stop?

 

[Surat]

So, if it’s a valid Terry Stop in your eyes, then what is the RS? What crime are you reasonably articulating a suspicion of to believe that it’s a valid stop?

At the very least, based on the circumstances described by the OP there would be reasonable suspiction that there was a man carrying a concealed weapon, which I amassuming is a misdemeanor if you don't have a perimt. Based on the fact no less than 12 officers showed up, I am guessing that something more "serious" was phoned in.


Can't tell from here but i'll guess based on the latter officer's remarks. . .

Suzie Scanner saw the OP's gun, freaked out and called 911 saying ". . .there as a man with a gun in the store and she thinks he's suspicious. He's been back in the art supplies for forever. I think he's gonna rob the place. There's this woman with him. I think they are drug addicts. He's wearing X shirt and pants. Please hury, he's headed twoards the front!

Can't know without hearing how the call came out. . . but I have my suspicions.

comes back under good faith

 

[Aran]

And it would be a felony if a felon was carrying it. Should it be automatically assumed that someone engaged in an activity is doing so illegally?

Should everyone driving be checked for a license, just to be sure?

 

[stevemis]

Surat,

Could you please explain how you would approach an individual peacefully openly carrying, as an officer, in the state of NC?

Thanks!

 

[Surat]

Surat,

Could you please explain how you would approach an individual peacefully openly carrying, as an officer in the state of NC?

Thanks!

Depends. Define peacful open carry. Walking down the city street? Driving down the street in car? Many store owners/operators open carry, as do many motorists. Open carry is most oent sene in rural areas, where as CC is the order of the day in most urban environments. It's generally a non issue. When I do encounter someone carrying open and I have a reason to interact (traffic stop) I generally have them place it on the dash and I'll retrieve it and unload it give it back when I'm done.

And it would be a felony if a felon was carrying it. Should it be automatically assumed that someone engaged in an activity is doing so illegally?

Should everyone driving be checked for a license, just to be sure?

We do conduct license check points. . . gotten plenty of NOL tickets out of them too in addition to other charges. Personally I favor doing them around the methdone clinic on a Satruday (as people are coming in to get their Sat & Sun doses)

Once again, can't know without hearing how the call came out.

Obviously, there was some reason to send ot 12 cops to Walmart at 2am.

 

[stevemis]

Define peacful open carry. Walking down the city street? Driving down the street in car? Many store owners/operators open carry, as do many motorists.

I'm not sure why it would matter, but let's keep this at least tangentally related to the existing thread and say it's WalMart. I can further complicate this and state the mode of transport to and from the WalMart is by vehicle.

 

[poor_richard]

At the very least, based on the circumstances described by the OP there would be reasonable suspiction that there was a man carrying a concealed weapon, which I amassuming is a misdemeanor if you don't have a perimt.
…

Are you suggesting that the mere carrying of a concealed pistol (in and of itself), is RS for detaining someone on the basis that they may be carrying without a permit? The sighting of a concealed handgun (in and of itself) is not RS, because one may legally do so. One does not need to prove they are legal. If you still believe its RS, then I highly recommend you check with your prosecutor.

http://policechiefmagazine.org/maga...n=display_arch&article_id=757&issue_id=122005

Now, your claiming (if I’ve got this right) CCW (carrying a concealed weapon (without a permit)) as the crime you have RS for. How do you articulate that suspicion? You aren’t seriously going to say that you suspect a person of illegally carrying a concealed weapon , just because they’ve been observed carrying a concealed weapon, are you?

Based on the fact no less than 12 officers showed up, I am guessing that something more "serious" was phoned in…

Tony’s in Manassas, OCB in PA. Nothing serious was called in for them, just over reacting police. 12 officers showing up means that 12 officers showed up. It doesn’t indicate the seriousness of the call. It can indicate the seriousness of a call, but not necessarily so.

Can't tell from here but i'll guess based on the latter officer's remarks. . .

Which remarks would that be.

I appreciate you going over this with me, and I appreciate your telling me what crime you believe validated the stop, but you still haven’t articulated the reasonable suspicion portion of that requirement. I’m sure that your aware that you can’t just say, “well, he could be illegal, so I think I’ll just stop him and check him out.” Granted, you can stop anyone for any reason you so choose (justifiable or not). Chances are it probably won’t go any further than the investigative interview, but if you base your RS on legal activity (just because you automatically cast suspicion on all who carry concealed), that doesn’t mean that your meeting the RS requirement of a Terry Stop.

…the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000 ruled that an anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun is not sufficient to justify a police officer's stop and frisk of that person, even where descriptive detail regarding the subject has been corroborated. The Court declined to adopt the "firearms exception" to Terry's requirement of reasonable suspicion
…

...If the person denies having a firearm or refuses to answer, and the officer does not otherwise have (legally sufficient) reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, the officer must allow the person to continue on his or her way....

Look at it this way. If CO is a state in which it is not required that permit holders inform officers, then all he would have to do upon initial contact is ask the officer, “under suspicion of what crime are you detaining me for?”, and “what is your reasonable suspicion”. If all the officer has is, “we got a call that you are carrying a concealed gun, and we observed it.”, do you really consider that RS!? Take it a step further, and assume that the suspect did in fact not have a permit. Are you still going to maintain in your report that your RS was “he had a holstered handgun.”? Take it even further and assume that he recorded the entire stop (this is a reality as more and more gun carriers are considering a digital recorder part of their every day carry gear, and lets assume for the sake of this discussion that recording the event is legal in that jurisdiction). Are you truly going to base your RS on a legal activity (remember, even though he is carrying illegally, your basing it not on that, but that he has a gun, which is a legal activity).

I’ll have to read your response tomorrow, as it’s getting late/early.

I do hope you continue this conversation, as I truly appreciate your input.

Once again, thanks for your service.

 

[Surat]

Are we playing AD&D now?

You enter a ten by ten stone corridor. . .

I can't play what if without a scenario.

I really don't wanna play game of "twit the cop."

 

[BruceRDucer]

At the very least, based on the circumstances described by the OP there would be reasonable suspiction that there was a man carrying a concealed weapon, which I amassuming is a misdemeanor if you don't have a perimt. Based on the fact no less than 12 officers showed up, I am guessing that something more "serious" was phoned in.----Surat

The matter here reduces to issue of FACT. The facts are, that whoever saw the firearm:

(1) did not see a DRAWN firearm

(2) did not see PTK doing anything outside of the ordinary activity of shopping at Wal-Mart

(3) did not see PTK's lady companion doing anything inconsistent with shopping at Wal-Mart

This entire issue reduces to somebody seeing a firearm in a hoslter, and concluding:

"The-Sky-Is-Falling!"

//

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

"The matter here reduces to issue of FACT. The facts are, that whoever saw the firearm:

(1) did not see a DRAWN firearm

(2) did not see PTK doing anything outside of the ordinary activity of shopping at Wal-Mart

(3) did not see PTK's lady companion doing anything inconsistent with shopping at Wal-Mart

This entire issue reduces to somebody seeing a firearm in a hoslter, and concluding:

"The-Sky-Is-Falling!""

since you were there to know all this why didn't you step up when you saw it go down? or should we change the word are in your first sentence to read "as they were presented to us"

 

[RPCVYemen]

And how am I supposed to know that you are a good guy? Because you tell me?

Many folks will never understand this - including many on THR.

It makes perfect sense to start an encounter with unknown person with a lot of caution - taking temporary control of the gun and the person. If you are wrong, they are very quickly on their way. If you are right, you may save your life, and the lives of others around you.

If you decided to proceed without caution - to turn your back on an unknown armed man - if you are wrong, you don't make it home for the shift. If you are right, they are very quickly on their.

The benefits of caution are pretty obvious.

I am not speaking about theory - in my hitchhiking days, contact with officers was not uncommon. I had no objection to being stopped and temporarily detained.

Once "temporarily" turned out to be 45 minutes, while the officer checked me out. And that was fine with me. My description matched that of a guy who had killed his family and disappeared. It seemed to me that the officer could well have arrested me let somebody else sort it all out. Instead, he spent an hour checking me out by radio (that was before computers). He did me a favor, the way I read it. Would I rather be sitting in his nice warm cruiser while he checks me out, or sitting in jail in Newark, NJ?

As long as the assumption of control of weapon and unknown person is temporary, I don't see any rights issues here. The officers sounded to me like there were doing their jobs exactly as they should be doing their jobs.

Mike

 

[PTK]

As long as the assumption of control of weapon and unknown person is temporary, I don't see any rights issues here. The officers sounded to me like there were doing their jobs exactly as they should be doing their jobs.

Sort of odd that the call in (active shooter event) was very obviously wrong, by the simple fact I was standing in a checkout line with a cart full of items... don't you figure that alone should've been a clue to the police?

In any case, the only law that may have been broken would have been a misdemeanor (carriage of concealed arms without a permit) and still didn't warrant that sort of treatment, IMHO.