MT GUNNY
Member
Does Some one have a link to the ACtual Federal Law that applys to the Subject of Post Offices and Federal Property?
Got made, today.
- Thread starter GLOOB
- Start date
- Status
MT GUNNY
Member
Sec. 930. Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities
(a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.
(b) Whoever, with intent that a firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the commission of a crime, knowingly possesses or causes to be present such firearm or dangerous weapon in a Federal facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(c) A person who kills or attempts to kill any person in the course of a violation of subsection (a) or (b), or in the course of an attack on a Federal facility involving the use of a firearm or other dangerous weapon, shall be punished as provided in sections 1111, 1112, and 1113.
(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to:
(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law;or
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.
(e) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm in a Federal court facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to conduct which is described in paragraph(1) or (2) of subsection (d).
(f) Nothing in this section limits the power of a court of the United States to punish for contempt or to promulgate rules or orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting the possession of weapons within any building housing such court or any of its proceedings, or upon any grounds appurtenant to such building.
(g) As used in this section:
(1) The term "Federal facility" means a building or part thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties.
(2) The term "dangerous weapon" means a weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance, animate or inanimate, that is used for, or is readily capable of, causing death or serious bodily injury, except that such term does not include a pocket knife with a blade of less than 2 1/2 inches in length.
(3) The term "Federal court facility" means the courtroom, judges' chambers, witness rooms, jury deliberation rooms, attorney conference rooms, prisoner holding cells, offices of the court clerks, the United States attorney, and the United States marshal, probation and parole offices, and adjoining corridors of any court of the United States.
(h) Notice of the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal facility, and notice of subsection (e) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal court facility, and no person shall be convicted of an offense under subsection (a) or (e) with respect to a Federal facility if such notice is not so posted at such facility, unless such person had actual notice of subsection(a) or (e), as the case may be.
(a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.
(b) Whoever, with intent that a firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the commission of a crime, knowingly possesses or causes to be present such firearm or dangerous weapon in a Federal facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(c) A person who kills or attempts to kill any person in the course of a violation of subsection (a) or (b), or in the course of an attack on a Federal facility involving the use of a firearm or other dangerous weapon, shall be punished as provided in sections 1111, 1112, and 1113.
(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to:
(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law;or
(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.
(e) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm in a Federal court facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to conduct which is described in paragraph(1) or (2) of subsection (d).
(f) Nothing in this section limits the power of a court of the United States to punish for contempt or to promulgate rules or orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting the possession of weapons within any building housing such court or any of its proceedings, or upon any grounds appurtenant to such building.
(g) As used in this section:
(1) The term "Federal facility" means a building or part thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties.
(2) The term "dangerous weapon" means a weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance, animate or inanimate, that is used for, or is readily capable of, causing death or serious bodily injury, except that such term does not include a pocket knife with a blade of less than 2 1/2 inches in length.
(3) The term "Federal court facility" means the courtroom, judges' chambers, witness rooms, jury deliberation rooms, attorney conference rooms, prisoner holding cells, offices of the court clerks, the United States attorney, and the United States marshal, probation and parole offices, and adjoining corridors of any court of the United States.
(h) Notice of the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal facility, and notice of subsection (e) shall be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each Federal court facility, and no person shall be convicted of an offense under subsection (a) or (e) with respect to a Federal facility if such notice is not so posted at such facility, unless such person had actual notice of subsection(a) or (e), as the case may be.
It just hit me wrong buck460XVR. I just get annoyed because some people get the all cops are Jack Booted Thugs attitude while others get the attitude that police officers are always right. I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle, I have encountered some power tripping idiots in law enforcement, I have also encountered some decent people that are trying to do a difficult job. But I have read enough articles about people getting harrassed for legally carrying firearms lately (cases where lawsuits were filed against police & won by the plaintiff) that I may be a touch oversensitive on this issue.
This is from the Michigan state police web sight.
Proper Conduct During Encounters with Police
Responsibilities of Individuals With a CCW License:
An individual licensed to carry a concealed pistol who is stopped by a police officer (traffic stop or otherwise) while in possession of a pistol shall immediately disclose to the police officer that he or she is carrying a concealed pistol either on their person or in their motor vehicle.
I read that and the key word that stands out to me is the STOPPED. When the op was at ups he wasnt stopped by any means and imo didnt have to declare he was carrying. I dont know what state the op lives in or that states law. I believe the op has it correct in post 55.
Also in post 55 the op said that the cop said he seen what he thought to be a gun and was being careful. So the cop didnt actually see a gun just what the cop thought was a gun so cops can stop and harrass you if you have a bulge under your shirt.
Proper Conduct During Encounters with Police
Responsibilities of Individuals With a CCW License:
An individual licensed to carry a concealed pistol who is stopped by a police officer (traffic stop or otherwise) while in possession of a pistol shall immediately disclose to the police officer that he or she is carrying a concealed pistol either on their person or in their motor vehicle.
I read that and the key word that stands out to me is the STOPPED. When the op was at ups he wasnt stopped by any means and imo didnt have to declare he was carrying. I dont know what state the op lives in or that states law. I believe the op has it correct in post 55.
Also in post 55 the op said that the cop said he seen what he thought to be a gun and was being careful. So the cop didnt actually see a gun just what the cop thought was a gun so cops can stop and harrass you if you have a bulge under your shirt.
Hey, GLOOB, consider this interpretation:
"Quote:
(l) Weapons and explosives . Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, ..." Yes, 'in other words, "Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law..." (including the 2d amendment of the U.S. Constitution) you can neither keep nor bear arms in this post office." And Brinks guards carry arms into my bank, but the same bank won't let ME protect MY money Raskol: "And don't forget that the very notion of having to be licensed to "bear arms" is unconstitutional." Very correct! There is a difference between a "license" (state, county, federal, etc.) and a "Permit" ( the Constitution.)
"Quote:
(l) Weapons and explosives . Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, ..." Yes, 'in other words, "Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law..." (including the 2d amendment of the U.S. Constitution) you can neither keep nor bear arms in this post office." And Brinks guards carry arms into my bank, but the same bank won't let ME protect MY money Raskol: "And don't forget that the very notion of having to be licensed to "bear arms" is unconstitutional." Very correct! There is a difference between a "license" (state, county, federal, etc.) and a "Permit" ( the Constitution.)
Last edited:
RoostRider
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2008
- Messages
- 670
In an effort to leave this thread more on track, I direct anyone with questions about the legalities of Post Office carry over here....
Some good input on the subject already....
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=457576
Some good input on the subject already....
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=457576
onlymeself
Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2009
- Messages
- 48
Here is the NC las concerning disclosing:
Any individual who has applied for and has been issued a concealed handgun permitmust follow certain regulations concerning its use. Not only must the individual carry the permit along with proper identification whenever the handgun is being carried concealed,but he/she must also inform any law enforcement officer who approaches him/her that he/she is in possession of a permit and a concealed handgun. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-415.11(a) Failure to do so is a first offense infraction and subjects the permittee topayment of a fine of up to $100.00. However, in lieu of paying a fine for the first offense,the individual may choose to surrender his or her permit. Any subsequent offense shall bepunishable as a Class 2 Misdemeanor. Any individual who violates any other standards forthe carrying of a concealed handgun with a permit is guilty of a Class 2 Misdemeanor. Anyperson who has not been issued a valid permit but carries a concealed handgun, is guilty ofcommitting a Class 2 Misdemeanor for the first offense, and any subsequent offenses areClass I Felonies. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-415.21(a-b)
Approaches is defined as "to draw near."
I think I would have been thankful that I wasn't face down on the pavement and didn't have a $100 fine to pay. Sounds like maybe the LEO was being nice about it really. As far as following you maybe he was checking out the rest of your story, or maybe at this point you were a little paranoid. Had a LEO follow me through town one day, switch lanes when I did, turned where I did, he went to the neighbors house.
Any individual who has applied for and has been issued a concealed handgun permitmust follow certain regulations concerning its use. Not only must the individual carry the permit along with proper identification whenever the handgun is being carried concealed,but he/she must also inform any law enforcement officer who approaches him/her that he/she is in possession of a permit and a concealed handgun. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-415.11(a) Failure to do so is a first offense infraction and subjects the permittee topayment of a fine of up to $100.00. However, in lieu of paying a fine for the first offense,the individual may choose to surrender his or her permit. Any subsequent offense shall bepunishable as a Class 2 Misdemeanor. Any individual who violates any other standards forthe carrying of a concealed handgun with a permit is guilty of a Class 2 Misdemeanor. Anyperson who has not been issued a valid permit but carries a concealed handgun, is guilty ofcommitting a Class 2 Misdemeanor for the first offense, and any subsequent offenses areClass I Felonies. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-415.21(a-b)
Approaches is defined as "to draw near."
I think I would have been thankful that I wasn't face down on the pavement and didn't have a $100 fine to pay. Sounds like maybe the LEO was being nice about it really. As far as following you maybe he was checking out the rest of your story, or maybe at this point you were a little paranoid. Had a LEO follow me through town one day, switch lanes when I did, turned where I did, he went to the neighbors house.
Ok, well to be fully accurate, he never actually approached me. I said hi, he turned and walked away. I got my boxes. I walked up to the door. He stood well off the the right side of the door and said blah blah from twenty feet away. I actually recall wondering how he knew the door was locked, because he was so far away and I hadn't heard him try it. I said blah blah. I left. He never walked toward me or tried to gain my attention. He never asked me a question. And the closest we ever were to each other was about 15 feet, which was when I first exited the car.
If I was on the ground eating pavement, believe me I'd be pissed.
If you would feel that lucky, I don't know why you bother carrying at all. You'd even go so far as to define "approach" as "draw near?" That would literally mean you declare to any cop who walks by you... or is running by you in pursuit of a felon? And how would you define "near." That's a relative term, so you might as well start actively seeking police and telling everyone who would listen that you're carrying a gun, in case they happen to have ever walked in your direction??
This seems to be getting more and more a matter of "which side are you on? Pro gun or anti gun?" Interpretations are key. I don't like the sound of those two sentences I quoted, in particular.
Last edited:
Maverick223
Member
Rightly so.
Helpful cops = run, don't walk?
There's one other thing that has been making me feel queasy, and I think I've just figured it out. Damn, I'm slow.
There's one other thing the cop said, which I'll get get to later. The point being that in hindsight, the cop was using all his jedi mind tricks to get me to go inside the closed UPS building.
I was still too far from the front door to see the sign, when the officer says in the most helpful tone, "The front door is locked. You might wanna use the side door." He points to the side entrance. That immediately struck me as odd. If the front door was locked, wouldn't there be a reason? In addition, I strongly suspected he didn't even try the door. He was too far away. But he was a police officer, and I didn't want to offend him by ignoring his advice.
So I actually walked a few yards over and peeked inside the doorless side entrance. It was obviously a service entrance that is not for customers. I don't see any entrance to the office. Then I walked back to the front door to verify what I already suspect. As I'm trying to read the sign, he speaks, again. The officer is apparently just full of help. He says, "there's voices inside," in a suggestive tone.
Again, odd. But I quickly decided the officer was just a well-meaning idiot. So I ignored him and continued to read the hours. Yep, closed.
"It's closed," I say, firmly. "I guess I'm off to the post office."
He knew full well from the beginning that the office was closed. And here he is doing everything he can to get me to enter through the service entrance.
Was he trying to persuade me to enter a premise that was marked as no guns?? Again, I have never noticed this sign, but according to another member, his UPS has signs posted.
Or maybe he just wanted me to hang around awhile so he could call backup.
Either way, it's an unpleasant revelation of the police using his most friendly and helpful voice to try to bend me over and **** me. I'm soooo glad I didn't go to the post office.
There's one other thing that has been making me feel queasy, and I think I've just figured it out. Damn, I'm slow.
There's one other thing the cop said, which I'll get get to later. The point being that in hindsight, the cop was using all his jedi mind tricks to get me to go inside the closed UPS building.
I was still too far from the front door to see the sign, when the officer says in the most helpful tone, "The front door is locked. You might wanna use the side door." He points to the side entrance. That immediately struck me as odd. If the front door was locked, wouldn't there be a reason? In addition, I strongly suspected he didn't even try the door. He was too far away. But he was a police officer, and I didn't want to offend him by ignoring his advice.
So I actually walked a few yards over and peeked inside the doorless side entrance. It was obviously a service entrance that is not for customers. I don't see any entrance to the office. Then I walked back to the front door to verify what I already suspect. As I'm trying to read the sign, he speaks, again. The officer is apparently just full of help. He says, "there's voices inside," in a suggestive tone.
Again, odd. But I quickly decided the officer was just a well-meaning idiot. So I ignored him and continued to read the hours. Yep, closed.
"It's closed," I say, firmly. "I guess I'm off to the post office."
He knew full well from the beginning that the office was closed. And here he is doing everything he can to get me to enter through the service entrance.
Was he trying to persuade me to enter a premise that was marked as no guns?? Again, I have never noticed this sign, but according to another member, his UPS has signs posted.
Or maybe he just wanted me to hang around awhile so he could call backup.
Either way, it's an unpleasant revelation of the police using his most friendly and helpful voice to try to bend me over and **** me. I'm soooo glad I didn't go to the post office.
RoostRider
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2008
- Messages
- 670
Bah, everyones making too much of it..... you did the right thing, the cop did the right thing, no one was harmed, no problem....
Overthinking things is relatively pointless... since even you only have half the story..... we only have 1/4 at best.... lol
Keep the laws in mind and keep on carrying.....
Overthinking things is relatively pointless... since even you only have half the story..... we only have 1/4 at best.... lol
Keep the laws in mind and keep on carrying.....
Kilo729- DETAINED means held or prevented from moving freely. ARRESTED means taken into custody. One need not be arrested to be detained. I am right and you are wrong about whether the subject was detained. HE WAS DETAINED against his will.
Cops have to obey the law. This cop was making it up as he went along. He had zero probable cause, which is the reasonable suspicion that a crime is taking place. I don't know the law in that state, and some require permit holders to disclose that they are armed if they have contact with law enforcement. If that's the law there then he should have done it. If not, then he was under no obligation to do anything other than what he was doing, which was the lawful going about his business.
You go right ahead and bet that my suit would be "bounced out of court." But don't bet a lot.
Cops have to obey the law. This cop was making it up as he went along. He had zero probable cause, which is the reasonable suspicion that a crime is taking place. I don't know the law in that state, and some require permit holders to disclose that they are armed if they have contact with law enforcement. If that's the law there then he should have done it. If not, then he was under no obligation to do anything other than what he was doing, which was the lawful going about his business.
You go right ahead and bet that my suit would be "bounced out of court." But don't bet a lot.
Sapper771
Member
Ok, I am a Cop . I am not saying anything was done right or wrong in this situation, but I will attempt to provide my two cents.
Yesterday, I was dispatched to locate a possible drunk driver. Dispatch advised me that the tags on the possible drunk driver's vehicle was registered to a complex that is associated with drugs and firearms. I get to the area of the complex and locate the vehicle. As I make my approach on the vehicle, I see 3 males standing on the far side. I make it around the vehicle, and one of them looks directly at me, slowly lifts the right side of his shirt up with his left hand, brings his right hand up to hip level, and I hear a "snap" sound. Well, my gun came out and I started giving him commands. It took him a few seconds to realize what was going on, and he finally quit doing what he was doing. My back up unit arrived on scene the same time I did, and he had no idea what I was doing with my gun out. It turned out that the guy was drunk and "just wanted to mess with the police" by pretending he was drawing a gun.
These are the types of people I deal with everyday.
Not saying that every person I come in contact with is this stupid or dumb, just saying that there are some real geniuses out there that dont really get it. There are people out there that do not care to kill cops. So , with that being said, I will take whatever precations I see fit to ensure my safety and the safety of others.
GLOOB: I do believe that the officer was just organizing back up to stop you somewhere else , other than the UPS store. I would have done the same thing. I would not feel very safe while speaking with you by myself and you being armed. Thats just the way I feel, and probably a lot of other Police Officers on here too. I have disarmed several permit holders for a short duration, and I was in the right to do so. We dont know you to be a criminal or a law abiding citizen. Thats the worst thing about Policing.....the criminals know what they are about to do to us, we dont, and when they do, we have to respond accordingly (i.e.: use the right amount of force, the right defensive weapon or device, no collateral damage, no innocent bystanders, fire the correct # of rounds, ensure the safe back stop, etc).
You did the right thing. When I deal with permit holders , they are normally very respectful and honest individuals. I even tell those same permit holders that I am glad they are carrying firearms, because there arent enough of us out there. I have also dealt with those types of permit holders who get pissed off when you ask them if they are carrying a firearm. I believe in the right to keep and bear arms, and I support it. I also do understand that there are people that should not be allowed to carry firearms. For example: Officers were dispatch to a road rage incident involving two trucks .Dispatch advised officers that the suspect was armed with a handgun and had threatened the complaintant with it during the altercation. Officers were able to intercept the alleged suspect vehicle. The suspect stated that he did draw his weapon and show it to the complaintant in order to "scare him". The suspect was in possession of a valid Carry Permit.
Again, just an example of what we deal with.
A couple of months ago, I stopped a guy for speeding (58mph in a 30mph zone). I caught up to him and he didnt exactly pull over at the next available place. He finally stopped and I made my approach. I got to the window and noticed the rather large chromed out revolver in the passenger seat. The driver went to reach for it, and I drew my weapon, aimed it at him, started moving back, and started giving commands. I got him out of the car and placed him in handcuffs.
He was a legal permit holder. He stated that he was going to unload it and give it to me to hold on to until we were done with the stop.
The guy may have been serious about unloading it in the proper manner, and relieving his weapon to me for safe keeping til our business was done, but how was I suppose to know ?
We as Police Officers have to add stuff up. Like in the above traffic stop. The guy was speeding ( 28 mph over the limit), he didnt stop at the next available spot,
and I get up there and he reaches for a big freak'in revolver.
This gut could have just did a home invasion, and he thinks I am on to him, but how do I know?
But as far as three cops surrounding an individual that may be carrying a firearm, that is not excessive force, that is called Officer presence and situational control.
Trust me, when things break bad, you want as many officers there as possible to help you. I have been there, both here and abroad, I know how good it feels to see tha Cav come in.
I try not to make judgements on others situations, especially cop stories, which everyone has them, including me. People tell me that the cops follow them all the time. I ask them why, they usually say that they use to be a drug user. I tell them thats why. Other will say that a cop was following them the other day, I ask them what road they were on, and they tell me the name of a major road that runs through my jurisdiction. I tell them that the cop was probably just driving around. I get paid by the hour, so I dont make it a habit to drive fast when I dont have to. I have followed people, because they were called in on as a possible DUI.
I can also run your tags on your vehicle all day long. I can also run the name on your registration all day long. I can see that the owner of the vehicle is licensed to carry a firearm in the state of TN, but how do I know that the owner is driving the vehicle? How do I know that this vehicle isnt stolen ?
A lot of stuff comes into play.
No , we arent your friend, but I guarranty we will be there for you when you need us......and probably times when you dont, but that is the job. I have been cursed one day, then hugged and praised by the same person the very next day. I agree, I never liked the police when I was young, but I respected them a lot. That the way I was raised.
From a professional stand point I see nothing wrong was done in GLOOB's situation. The Police acted accordingly, and so did GLOOB. Nobody won , nobody lost, Civil rights are intact, everyone went home alive.
Yesterday, I was dispatched to locate a possible drunk driver. Dispatch advised me that the tags on the possible drunk driver's vehicle was registered to a complex that is associated with drugs and firearms. I get to the area of the complex and locate the vehicle. As I make my approach on the vehicle, I see 3 males standing on the far side. I make it around the vehicle, and one of them looks directly at me, slowly lifts the right side of his shirt up with his left hand, brings his right hand up to hip level, and I hear a "snap" sound. Well, my gun came out and I started giving him commands. It took him a few seconds to realize what was going on, and he finally quit doing what he was doing. My back up unit arrived on scene the same time I did, and he had no idea what I was doing with my gun out. It turned out that the guy was drunk and "just wanted to mess with the police" by pretending he was drawing a gun.
These are the types of people I deal with everyday.
Not saying that every person I come in contact with is this stupid or dumb, just saying that there are some real geniuses out there that dont really get it. There are people out there that do not care to kill cops. So , with that being said, I will take whatever precations I see fit to ensure my safety and the safety of others.
GLOOB: I do believe that the officer was just organizing back up to stop you somewhere else , other than the UPS store. I would have done the same thing. I would not feel very safe while speaking with you by myself and you being armed. Thats just the way I feel, and probably a lot of other Police Officers on here too. I have disarmed several permit holders for a short duration, and I was in the right to do so. We dont know you to be a criminal or a law abiding citizen. Thats the worst thing about Policing.....the criminals know what they are about to do to us, we dont, and when they do, we have to respond accordingly (i.e.: use the right amount of force, the right defensive weapon or device, no collateral damage, no innocent bystanders, fire the correct # of rounds, ensure the safe back stop, etc).
You did the right thing. When I deal with permit holders , they are normally very respectful and honest individuals. I even tell those same permit holders that I am glad they are carrying firearms, because there arent enough of us out there. I have also dealt with those types of permit holders who get pissed off when you ask them if they are carrying a firearm. I believe in the right to keep and bear arms, and I support it. I also do understand that there are people that should not be allowed to carry firearms. For example: Officers were dispatch to a road rage incident involving two trucks .Dispatch advised officers that the suspect was armed with a handgun and had threatened the complaintant with it during the altercation. Officers were able to intercept the alleged suspect vehicle. The suspect stated that he did draw his weapon and show it to the complaintant in order to "scare him". The suspect was in possession of a valid Carry Permit.
Again, just an example of what we deal with.
A couple of months ago, I stopped a guy for speeding (58mph in a 30mph zone). I caught up to him and he didnt exactly pull over at the next available place. He finally stopped and I made my approach. I got to the window and noticed the rather large chromed out revolver in the passenger seat. The driver went to reach for it, and I drew my weapon, aimed it at him, started moving back, and started giving commands. I got him out of the car and placed him in handcuffs.
He was a legal permit holder. He stated that he was going to unload it and give it to me to hold on to until we were done with the stop.
The guy may have been serious about unloading it in the proper manner, and relieving his weapon to me for safe keeping til our business was done, but how was I suppose to know ?
We as Police Officers have to add stuff up. Like in the above traffic stop. The guy was speeding ( 28 mph over the limit), he didnt stop at the next available spot,
and I get up there and he reaches for a big freak'in revolver.
This gut could have just did a home invasion, and he thinks I am on to him, but how do I know?
But as far as three cops surrounding an individual that may be carrying a firearm, that is not excessive force, that is called Officer presence and situational control.
Trust me, when things break bad, you want as many officers there as possible to help you. I have been there, both here and abroad, I know how good it feels to see tha Cav come in.
I try not to make judgements on others situations, especially cop stories, which everyone has them, including me. People tell me that the cops follow them all the time. I ask them why, they usually say that they use to be a drug user. I tell them thats why. Other will say that a cop was following them the other day, I ask them what road they were on, and they tell me the name of a major road that runs through my jurisdiction. I tell them that the cop was probably just driving around. I get paid by the hour, so I dont make it a habit to drive fast when I dont have to. I have followed people, because they were called in on as a possible DUI.
I can also run your tags on your vehicle all day long. I can also run the name on your registration all day long. I can see that the owner of the vehicle is licensed to carry a firearm in the state of TN, but how do I know that the owner is driving the vehicle? How do I know that this vehicle isnt stolen ?
A lot of stuff comes into play.
No , we arent your friend, but I guarranty we will be there for you when you need us......and probably times when you dont, but that is the job. I have been cursed one day, then hugged and praised by the same person the very next day. I agree, I never liked the police when I was young, but I respected them a lot. That the way I was raised.
From a professional stand point I see nothing wrong was done in GLOOB's situation. The Police acted accordingly, and so did GLOOB. Nobody won , nobody lost, Civil rights are intact, everyone went home alive.
george29
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2006
- Messages
- 1,670
And then when I read your signature (Atheist gun owner, and a real liberal) I stopped wondering why you were being rude and confrontational when I was just stating an opinion. Mike Niphong isn't Tin Foil, neither was Janet Reno's Storm Troopers forcefully kidnapping Elias Gonzales. God I hope you have one of those experiences with the authorities, maybe I can help, just PM me your address so I can call in a false Domestic Violence call, and I"ll say "I think he ownes a gun too."
Thanks for alerting me to needing to get you on my ignore list, you seem to have some chip on your shoulders when answering people that don't agree with you.
You're an idiot. Many of the people who have problems with police behavior are retired LEO. Is this your anger management therapy? Don't expect a reply, I got you on Ignore now too.
Parting shot to the angry know-it-all's. The first amendment means what it says, even for Mall cops, Armchair Commando's, Wannabe Cops and everyone else.
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,096
gee thanks........ is that you Rambo?
Most "know it alls" know that the first amendment is not about guns. I see no talk about the suppression of free speech in this thread at all.
This one has strayed WAY off the original topic.
Enough.
Enough.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked