LEO harassed my wife about CCW this morning

Status
Not open for further replies.
You do not have to notify. I have been pulled oversince having my permit and never even mentioned it. Sounds to me like this cop needs more training. I would contact his patrol supervisor and have the law re taught to him.
 
That officer is a 20 year veteran of that force, so it'll be swept under the rug, but at least he knows somebody knows the law!
Click to expand...
Am I interpreting this as saying you won't be pursuing this further?!
 
so it'll be swept under the rug
Click to expand...

if you let it.

and let's face it...this guy is goose squeeze. No way that this is his first offense abusing the badge if he has been at it for 20 years.

Is there a video tape?
 
FORGET the polite discussion with the chief, call your attorney and SUE the dept and this barney fife. He clearly violated her rights against illegal search and seizure. Unless your wife gave him specific verbal instructions that it was ok to search the vehicle. If nothing else she was tramatized and wasn't made aware of her rights.

The ony way these idiot cops can see the light at the end of the tunnel is if you hit there pockets, the departments rather.

I'm sure once the chief and police dept get the summons from the court they will be jumping thru hoops. Oh, and don't forget to anonymously call the local new channel and make the aware that cops are illegally searching vehicles without proper cause.
 
Wife goes to Cheif alone.
Asks Chief if usually has perverts on his force.
Tells the story.
Points out LEO was wrong.
Asks if the LEO was just looking for a cheap feel.
Tells the chief to take care of it

AFS
 
Keep us posted

I think the pat down is going to be the sticky part in this situation more so then not knowing the CCW law for this officer. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that "if" you had to pat down the opposite sex, and it wasn't an immediate threat, you had to have a witness observe the search. Two person rule.
 
Last edited:
Per my Advanced Tactical instructor, who is a sergeant in a large city PD, "Comply, and then sue their @$$ off. Collect your money and laugh all the way to the bank."

If this were me, I'd request a copy of the video from the dash cam...ASAP. Take it to my attorney, and settle this for good. Some people are intelligent and can learn with a textbook or a conversation. Others aren't so smart, and can only learn from negative reinforcement. Cash seems to be a real negative to the local community, when they have to apply a "court-mandated tax levy" (such as in Detroit) to cover the payments of the multiple settlements for "LEO" abuse. To boot, the whole process and public light, might also help this "LEO" to seek a career change. If he did this to one, he's done it to two, or more.

Good luck. Let us know how it works out.

Geno
 
I would never inform unless obligated to do so by law. I've spoken to several LEOs and most don't want to know because it creates more hassles for them. Why turn a simple traffic stop into an ordeal?
 
If people want to show their CCW without being legally obliged to, fine. However, there is absolutely no reason to berate others for not doing the same. There are enough laws out there that are tiptoieng around our rights. Why in the world should we voluntarily give up the rights that laws have not infringed? Give them an inch and they will take a mile, hasn't that been patently obvious with the gun grabbers and rights takers in the past?

I'd go do the head of the law enforcement for that county and make them aware of the incident. If they blow it off, I would have a talk with the District Attorney's office and maybe the media in the area. Again, if you willingly allow your rights to be trampled, especially those trampled AGAINST the law, then you are essentially giving up those rights. Rights undefended are rights lost.
 
That officer is a 20 year veteran of that force, so it'll be swept under the rug, but at least he knows somebody knows the law!
Click to expand...
only if you let it
get the dash-cam, make sure you have everything straight on your end, and at least write a nice open letter to the PD.
I wouldn't discourage you from deciding to sue, you might prevent the next Dan Harless from getting into those habits.
 
"Sounds like a rookie that only gets to carry one bullet in his pocket."

What does this mean?
Click to expand...

Barney Fife, Deputy Sheriff, Mayberry, RFD

One round in your pocket can be referred to as 'Condition Fife.'
 
It's been stated that it is not required.

Now it depends on what you want to accomplish.
Click to expand...

Preservation of 4th Amendment rights. It would make the cop's job a lot easier if I just submitted to a full body cavity search on every encounter with law enforcement. But I have the right not to do so. If I give up my rights, or let them get eroded, I really don't deserve to have them in first place.
 
I don't think the OP can actually take action on behalf of his wife; beyond talking to the chief. Maybe it's different back east :D
 
mjldeckard,

What part of search and seizure do you think I don't understand?

My post is in response to some posters that feel the officer broke the law. The real issue was did he have reasonable suspicion to conduct the search? Since a arrest was not made his actions can not be determined by a criminal court.

However when it comes to his judgment that is a different issue. It certainly seems to be inappropriate for the circumstances.

P.S. I have a B.S. degree in Criminal Justice and attended Graduate School studying the 4th Amendment. My law book on the subject of Supreme Court cases was about 5" thick. I am not a expert by any means but i graduated Magna Cum Laude so you can probably guess this is a favorite subject of mine. Anyway if there are some Supreme Court cases that leads you to a different conclusion please share it with the group.
 
File a complaint to the LEO department ASAP. It seems your wife cooperated, no need for attitude from the po-po.
 
BSA1 said:
mjldeckard,

What part of search and seizure do you think I don't understand?

My post is in response to some posters that feel the officer broke the law. The real issue was did he have reasonable suspicion to conduct the search? Since a arrest was not made his actions can not be determined by a criminal court.

However when it comes to his judgment that is a different issue. It certainly seems to be inappropriate for the circumstances.

P.S. I have a B.S. degree in Criminal Justice and attended Graduate School studying the 4th Amendment. My law book on the subject of Supreme Court cases was about 5" thick. I am not a expert by any means but i graduated Magna Cum Laude so you can probably guess this is a favorite subject of mine. Anyway if there are some Supreme Court cases that leads you to a different conclusion please share it with the group.
Click to expand...
The state can, byt the way, be held accountable for other actions than arrest. A 1983 suit for violation of civil rights, for example, does not require that there have been an arrest. Otherwise, in the cases where police shot and killed unarmed citizens, and obviously did not then arrest anyone, the heirs would have no recourse. By the way, I'm not implying there's anything about 4th amendment (or anything else) you don't understand. I'm just commenting on the issue of arrest.
 
BSA1 said:
David E,

But NOT without consent or probable cause.

Don't forget inventory search following a arrest.
Click to expand...

I didn't forget it, but it's totally inapplicable for the situation being discussed.
 
Having to do extra things that are outside the law because some cops are ignorant or "pricks" as said by someone else is backwards thinking. Its LEO job to be Government Administrators so maybe they should go the extra mile (not all of them) and learn the laws they are paid by tax dollars to up hold. They cant just handle situations as they see fit.
 
Its LEO job to be Government Administrators so maybe they should go the extra mile (not all of them) and learn the laws they are paid by tax dollars to up hold. They cant just handle situations as they see fit.
Click to expand...
They CAN... but you can ask FORMER Officer Daniel Harless of the Canton PD what happens sometimes when they do.

It may be fun to be a "big man" by the side of the road with somebody you've jacked up contrary to law, but when you're living in your mother's basement with your family because you lost your job and can't pay the mortgage, it's not nearly as amusing.
 
When statements are made such as, I would inform just to be safe, or on principle, or because some of the leo's are pricks, I get confused, whose safety or principles are you talking about? It sounds like a few posters think that the weapon is going to jump up and fire of it's own free will, or maybe the person do's not trust themselves and are afraid that they will lose control and use the weapon to fire upon what ever is available. If you cannot control yourself then you should not be armed, and if the leo is a prick the firearm may be needed for self defense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
  • Locked
Speeding Ticket and CCW
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
NavyLCDR
N
Z
  • Locked
Using someone else's CCW
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Sam1911
S
6
  • Locked
License Plate/CCW Permit Disassociation in VA
Replies
16
Views
2K
splithoof
S
D
  • Locked
(MI) Woman's gun may have saved her life (Police Chief was against CCW)
Replies
19
Views
1K
Barbara
B
guyfromohio
  • Locked
Is the U.S. sharing CCW info with foreign nations?
2 3
Replies
65
Views
3K
tarosean
tarosean
Back
Top