jcwit
member
I see 22lr just doesn't get it. COPS are civilians period, or do we now have the SS troops here? U.S. Army. Navy, Marines, Air Force, National Guard, Coast Guard, ect. are military and are not cilivians.
Harassed by police in Thermopolis, WY
- Thread starter wyocarp
- Start date
- Status
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
"Don't make foolishly overbroad statements. They make you look bad."
irony of the day
irony of the day
krs
Member
"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions."
"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
franconialocal
Member
Small town cop
Why can I speak to this topic with so much authority? Because I AM a small town cop....so let me clarify....
1. I rarely EVER just stop and start questioning someone without a reason (e.g. "suspicious person call", vandalism, etc.) esp. if all they are doing is walking down the street. It's called the 4th amendment, and not every officer "gets that", but we all have our different styles of how we operate. Yes, time of night, location, a "feeling" all come into play here, but hopefully an officers discretion will lend to giving some leeway. WE ARE HUMANS TOO who make mistakes, get "first impressions", don't know EVERYTHING about EVERY law there EVER was.....etc. etc.
2. No we aren't BORED SMALL TOWN COPS.....it's called OUR JOBS. We are expected to be just as PROACTIVE as REACTIVE in many ways. I'm too busy to be bored, even in a small town. Do you really think I WANT to have to make an arrest, do all the paperwork, get home late from shift, miss seeing my family, going to trial over a year later when I can barely remember the call, on and on and on???
3. Yes, you should say "My name is so and so, and I am carrying a weapon". If you are legal and have nothing to hide, then what's the problem with being honest? Keep your hands in a non-threatening posture, and work WITH the cops, not against them. Remember, we are not mind readers.
And cops?......yes, SMILE once in a while, it won't hurt.
Why can I speak to this topic with so much authority? Because I AM a small town cop....so let me clarify....
1. I rarely EVER just stop and start questioning someone without a reason (e.g. "suspicious person call", vandalism, etc.) esp. if all they are doing is walking down the street. It's called the 4th amendment, and not every officer "gets that", but we all have our different styles of how we operate. Yes, time of night, location, a "feeling" all come into play here, but hopefully an officers discretion will lend to giving some leeway. WE ARE HUMANS TOO who make mistakes, get "first impressions", don't know EVERYTHING about EVERY law there EVER was.....etc. etc.
2. No we aren't BORED SMALL TOWN COPS.....it's called OUR JOBS. We are expected to be just as PROACTIVE as REACTIVE in many ways. I'm too busy to be bored, even in a small town. Do you really think I WANT to have to make an arrest, do all the paperwork, get home late from shift, miss seeing my family, going to trial over a year later when I can barely remember the call, on and on and on???
3. Yes, you should say "My name is so and so, and I am carrying a weapon". If you are legal and have nothing to hide, then what's the problem with being honest? Keep your hands in a non-threatening posture, and work WITH the cops, not against them. Remember, we are not mind readers.
And cops?......yes, SMILE once in a while, it won't hurt.
Just to clarify a few things that relate to the original post for those that are interested:
If a LEO decides to say hello & strike up a conversation or even tries to "fish", it's generally called a "consensual encounter". In other words, there is no reasonable suspicion to believe criminal activity is afoot. You can't seize this person or search them for that matter.
Treo nails it down accurately when he advocates saying, "Am I being detained?" or something close. Ideally, it's "Am I free to leave?". That removes any doubt as to your "status".
The test question that the jury will consider (in this imaginary story) is "would a reasonable person believe they are free to leave?". This comes into play if an arrest is made, when the "evidence" is challenged. If a jury believes you were not free to leave, you are in "custody". Why the heck does that matter? Well, if you're in custody and are asked questions that are likely to evoke an incriminating answer, you are being "interogated" and require your rights to be read (Miranda). The concept being, that any incriminating evidence or statements will be suppressed.
If there's a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, you can be "detained" (not an arrest) and general field interview questions can be asked of you. You don't "have" to say anything. If this questioning/evidence reaches the level called "probable cause" (google it), an arrest can be made.
You can be patted down for safety, cuffed, etc. There has to be an articulable belief that someone is armed or may retreive an "arm", along with some form of criminal investigation. Not just a guy with a permit that you grab as he leaves the range.
Are you supposed to pat someone down on a mere anonymous tip, with nothing else? Not in my state. If a neighbor calls in 2 men walking up and down the street, staring in parked cars, it's likely that this will be associated with 2 guys looking to break into cars. That may be the reason the original guy was stopped...maybe, maybe not. We certainly don't get all the facts here.
The police never show up at your birthday party and give you a hug, it's usually something negative. You're the suspect, offender, victim, or witness, that's the reality of it. You have a right to have an negative opinion, just skip rationalizing why you got a ticket after a crash, got stopped coming home from the bar, stopped for MV violations, or questioned because you are printing. Believe it or not "protect & serve" is the directive.
Not trying to sound officious or give anyone a class on CJ, just trying to shed some light on why things happen.
stepping down from the soapbox......
If a LEO decides to say hello & strike up a conversation or even tries to "fish", it's generally called a "consensual encounter". In other words, there is no reasonable suspicion to believe criminal activity is afoot. You can't seize this person or search them for that matter.
Treo nails it down accurately when he advocates saying, "Am I being detained?" or something close. Ideally, it's "Am I free to leave?". That removes any doubt as to your "status".
The test question that the jury will consider (in this imaginary story) is "would a reasonable person believe they are free to leave?". This comes into play if an arrest is made, when the "evidence" is challenged. If a jury believes you were not free to leave, you are in "custody". Why the heck does that matter? Well, if you're in custody and are asked questions that are likely to evoke an incriminating answer, you are being "interogated" and require your rights to be read (Miranda). The concept being, that any incriminating evidence or statements will be suppressed.
If there's a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, you can be "detained" (not an arrest) and general field interview questions can be asked of you. You don't "have" to say anything. If this questioning/evidence reaches the level called "probable cause" (google it), an arrest can be made.
You can be patted down for safety, cuffed, etc. There has to be an articulable belief that someone is armed or may retreive an "arm", along with some form of criminal investigation. Not just a guy with a permit that you grab as he leaves the range.
Are you supposed to pat someone down on a mere anonymous tip, with nothing else? Not in my state. If a neighbor calls in 2 men walking up and down the street, staring in parked cars, it's likely that this will be associated with 2 guys looking to break into cars. That may be the reason the original guy was stopped...maybe, maybe not. We certainly don't get all the facts here.
The police never show up at your birthday party and give you a hug, it's usually something negative. You're the suspect, offender, victim, or witness, that's the reality of it. You have a right to have an negative opinion, just skip rationalizing why you got a ticket after a crash, got stopped coming home from the bar, stopped for MV violations, or questioned because you are printing. Believe it or not "protect & serve" is the directive.
Not trying to sound officious or give anyone a class on CJ, just trying to shed some light on why things happen.
stepping down from the soapbox......
mljdeckard
Member
Seen a lot of fake permits? When? Where? In WYOMING? When was the last time you heard of a news story that involved a fake CCW, or they busted up a ring or counterfeiters with a CCW printing press in the basement?
The younger version of me would have said; "That's ok. I've seen a lot of fake cops."
The younger version of me would have said; "That's ok. I've seen a lot of fake cops."
jcwit
member
You've got to remember this in a town with a population of around 3,000. I bet everyone in town knows who's counterfeiting the permits. hehe
Deanimator
Member
I believe in obeying the law... EVERYONE obeying the law.
If the law requires me to notify when carrying (as it does in Ohio), I'll notify. If it doesn't, I won't. I am NOT required to notify if I'm not carrying. I won't, period. I don't care if the cop likes it or not. He can like or dislike whatever he wants.
If I disobey the law, it's his duty to take appropriate action. His personal preferences are NOT the law. If he confuses those two, it's my duty to take appropriate action. That may be a formal complaint against him. It may be a civil lawsuit against him and his department.
EVERYBODY should obey the law. Some citizens disagree. Some cops do to.
Treo
member
Try being "honest " W/ an anti cop sometime and let us know how it works out for you.
Harassment? The infringement of rights? Where? When?
Most communities label their police contacting someone out of place at midnight "good police work." Small and/or affluent communities expect and demand it; larger ones lament the lack of such regular service.
In a small town, said good police work almost certainly was the result of a report of suspicious activity. Whether you were called in or noticed by a patrol officer, though, is largely irrelevant. The end result is necessarily the same: the police must make contact to clear the call, cite, or arrest as necessary.
Such contacts also frequently come about for the purpose of identifying or ruling out suspects of ongoing criminal investigations. You may have merely been in the wrong place at the wrong time. The contact, that being the case? Legitimate. The explanation? Purposefully lacking.
Most communities label their police contacting someone out of place at midnight "good police work." Small and/or affluent communities expect and demand it; larger ones lament the lack of such regular service.
In a small town, said good police work almost certainly was the result of a report of suspicious activity. Whether you were called in or noticed by a patrol officer, though, is largely irrelevant. The end result is necessarily the same: the police must make contact to clear the call, cite, or arrest as necessary.
Such contacts also frequently come about for the purpose of identifying or ruling out suspects of ongoing criminal investigations. You may have merely been in the wrong place at the wrong time. The contact, that being the case? Legitimate. The explanation? Purposefully lacking.
Last edited:
Deanimator
Member
You mean like this?
Anything you say can and will be used against you. Lots of innocent and honest people have gone to jail simply because they thought they had nothing to hide. Protect yourself and your family even if it's from that 1% of bad LEO's out there. For the same reason every LEO assumes you may be a bad guy. You have to assume that LEO may be bad as well.
Police are trained to arrest based on violations of state statute....that decision was apparently weighed by 3 cops in the field. We also look this stuff up when the paperwork is filled out. I am skeptical to say the least. Ok, lets get an internet expert to tell us about reciprocity in VA. This should be interesting.
I would ordinarily humor something resembling "news", but this looks like comic book fiction. If someone is so inclined, have them pdf the police report to you and post it. Just a simple FOI request....
I would ordinarily humor something resembling "news", but this looks like comic book fiction. If someone is so inclined, have them pdf the police report to you and post it. Just a simple FOI request....
Last edited:
george29
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2006
- Messages
- 1,670
Carrying two 640's and carrying two Glock 20's isn't the same thing at all. One is prudence, the other is something else, especially in a small town. I too carry regularily at least two handguns, one a 642 the other a NAA, sometimes my M10/SBH too if I'm going to be out late or far from home. Even with three guns I am carrying the equivelant of one G17 w/o spares. That's the difference between revolver carry and high cap pistol carry.
Legally though, I don't care.
As for the cops on this forum, there are plenty of former LEO's here too, I am one, and there are plenty of LEO's that I knew personally that were screw ups, some were on ego trips, others falsified reports, most had some superiority complex, made my job all the more difficult and I took an early pension just to escape the mentality. There are good cops, but the stigma of the a-hole is someting we all had to endure.
I won't volunteer that I am carrying unless asked, by law, I am not required to where I live. I am friendly and non-confrontational and mainly have been lucky to only be stopped once or twice by mature officers with many years experience. Young cops, especially in small towns are many times gung-ho and belligerent. I am very careful when going through small towns to drive under the speed limit and not take long nocturnal walks.
On the flip side, it's a hard life and I've learned that most cops do better when they see their job as a calling and not as a source of employment.
Last edited:
JImbothefiveth
Member
I'm not saying don't ever choose to remain silent, sometimes it's the right thing to do. Officer: "Sir, I noticed you were speeding. I'll need to see some I.D. When was the last time you violated a traffic law?" Person who was speeding:"Officer am I being detained? I will not talk without my lawyer!" But that seems like it's more likely to get you arrested than anything else. Plus, you still get the traffic ticket.
It is similiar, because either way it is carrying 2 guns of about the same power. The g20 does have more rounds, but if you do need to use it, what harm will they do? Even if you don't need the extra rounds? Heck, he might need it more in a small town, because if anyone attacks him with a gun, it might be a 30-06, or other deer rifle.
Last edited:
mgregg85
Member
Dang, two glock 20's? Talk about loaded for bear. Thats gotta be a heavy carry rig but hey, whatever makes you happy.
Correct statement before the officer speaks is to ask why you've been pulled over. In the above statement I would just give my registration and ID. There is no need to answer when you were last pulled over and there is no reason to confront the officer about your speed. If the officer asked again when you've been pulled over you can either A: not answer or B: ask "Are you going to issue a ticket or am I free to go?" You can answer, but it really has nothing to do with why you were stopped and can't help in court...
When I get pulled over I pull as far as I can off the road, roll down the window, turn off the car, turn on the dome light (at night) and keep my hands on the wheel till the officer comes up. I then will try and beat him to the punch and ask why I was stopped. 9 times out of 10 the officers are nice and there is no reason to go into strict protect your rights mode. Also in PA there is no requirement for me to announce that I'm armed. Armed or not I never make sudden movements and try and keep my hands on the wheel/in view at all times. This includes when the officer goes back to his cruiser.
Now if the situation is deteriorating then I will assert my rights... For example at a traffic stop if the officer gets snotty or is on a fishing expedition I will ask to leave. In my previous encounter with a snotty LEO as soon as I asked to leave he let me go. The car in front of me was turning and once they were out of my way I accelerated back up to the speed limit. He heard me accelerating and saw the light was yellow and assumed I was trying to beat the light. He wanted me to admit that I gunned it to beat the light. He had nothing and I gave him nothing and when I asked to leave that was the end of it.
Deanimator
Member
Assuming you're referring to the Fairfax incident, why don't you contact Phil van Cleve of the VCDL. There's a link to that organization at the bottom of the article.
Phydeaux642
Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2007
- Messages
- 1,886
Maybe his hat was on sideways and the top of his underwear was showing. Isn't that probable cause?
Sorry, that is not a Terry stop. The officer would have to be able to articulate why a crime has been or was about to be committed. Let's see someone do that with a person taking a stroll on a public sidewalk. I dont care what time it is and I don't care what gun(s) he is carrying concealed.
As for "having nothing to hide," why don't we just all consent to a full body cavity search? After all, if there's nothing to hide, what's the problem?
mljdeckard
Member
Terry v Ohio is the most abused power by police officers. Many of them are trained that it means they can search anyone, anytime they want to. I have personally watched in court, officers cross-examined who state this.
beatcop, if you are in that system, why are you asking others here to back it up? Isn't it easier for you than for them? If you don't believe it, why worry about it at all? I personally find it very believable that when one cop makes a call in the field, his other two cop buddies will back him up. I also believe that when you want clarification on a law, I trust the attorney general first. This forum isn't second, but I would ask in here before I would ever ask a cop.
Police are trained to use everything they can perceive against you, just like salesmen are trained to use every bit of info they can divine about you to steer you towards a sale.
beatcop, if you are in that system, why are you asking others here to back it up? Isn't it easier for you than for them? If you don't believe it, why worry about it at all? I personally find it very believable that when one cop makes a call in the field, his other two cop buddies will back him up. I also believe that when you want clarification on a law, I trust the attorney general first. This forum isn't second, but I would ask in here before I would ever ask a cop.
Police are trained to use everything they can perceive against you, just like salesmen are trained to use every bit of info they can divine about you to steer you towards a sale.
I find my level of cooperation varies to match the attitude of the officer. I'll never be rude, loud, or disrespectful regardless, but they'll have a harder time if they give me one. If an officer is polite and professional, I'll most likely hand over my I.D. and talk because I know that I haven't broken the law. If they start the "tough guy" rountine, I'll respond with my name, and then ask if I'm free to go.
I've never had a bad experience with Police Officers. I've had two "encounters," one for open carry, and one for an illegal fire my friends and I didn't know was illegal. In the Open Carry situation, the Officer told me she was responding to a call about a man with a gun, was very polite, and asked if I wouldn't mind giving my I.D. I complied because I saw no reason not to (I know, I should have held onto my rights, etc.). The whole thing lasted maybe 5-6 minutes. The fire was at a "state access" (whatever that is) and it was a state trooper who observed it from the road. It was at night and my friends and I were just roasting marshmellows and drinking soda. The trooper helped us put out the fire and wished us a good night.
I'm sure that if an Officer was certain I was doing something illegal that was actually worth pursuing, I would be treated differently, but I feel that over 99% of the time a law abiding citizen has nothing to worry about.
I've never had a bad experience with Police Officers. I've had two "encounters," one for open carry, and one for an illegal fire my friends and I didn't know was illegal. In the Open Carry situation, the Officer told me she was responding to a call about a man with a gun, was very polite, and asked if I wouldn't mind giving my I.D. I complied because I saw no reason not to (I know, I should have held onto my rights, etc.). The whole thing lasted maybe 5-6 minutes. The fire was at a "state access" (whatever that is) and it was a state trooper who observed it from the road. It was at night and my friends and I were just roasting marshmellows and drinking soda. The trooper helped us put out the fire and wished us a good night.
I'm sure that if an Officer was certain I was doing something illegal that was actually worth pursuing, I would be treated differently, but I feel that over 99% of the time a law abiding citizen has nothing to worry about.
He may get in 'big trouble' if you mean a butt chewing and bad press for doing nothing, true.
He may loose his job for doing nothing.
He won't ever end up in jail for doing nothing. LEO has NO duty to protect the individual. A LEO will not go to jail for letting a bank robber walk right by hiim, or for sitting in his squadcar finishing his coffee while an axe murderer is in the house next door hacking away.
Kind of Blued
Member
I can't understand why gun owners on a pro-gun forum are ridiculing a fellow gun owner for carrying two full-sized guns.
I don't care if it's "reasonable", why do you think it is even worth bringing up?
If we all thought like that none of us would have anything but a bolt-action rifle and an O/U 12 gauge.
I don't care if it's "reasonable", why do you think it is even worth bringing up?
If we all thought like that none of us would have anything but a bolt-action rifle and an O/U 12 gauge.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked