• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

4th LEO encounter!

I am...

  • - Out on Bail.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • - Released of my own recognizance.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    4

SteveO

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
13
Location
Rancho Cucamonga, California, USA
imported post

rpyne wrote:
marshaul wrote:
It's up to demnogis of course, but this may be a time to let it slide.

The officer didn't try to back out at all. He fully admitted his wrongdoing, and apologized.
I disagree. This is most definitely NOT a time to let it slide. The ONLY way the police in Komifornia, or anywhere else, are every going to get the message is by seeing one of their own lose every penny he has or ever hopes to have, or better yet ends up in prison, for violating the rights of a citizen.

Admitting they were wrong does not negate or excuse the wrongdoing any more than it would for any of us if we were to inadvertently violate the law. If demnogis had "made a mistake" and had a loaded magazine even touching his sidearm, you can bet that he would be sitting in a cell right now no matter how much he admitted his wrongdoing or apologized.

This was not merely an illegal prolonged detention, it was a full fledged false arrest. Nail them to the wall.
I totally disagree! I am not sure which is the better way to go (UOC or CCW). However lawsuits only paint us as money grabbers looking for a quick buck. What I read is at least 3 LEOs getting some continuing education and then with any luck transferring this to their fellow LEOs.
 

Phssthpok

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
1,026
Location
, ,
imported post

Going strictly from gut feeling I have to say that I think the apology, while no doubt partially motivated by a desire not to be sued, was indeed sincere, and a policy of 'forgive and forget' would apply.


HOWEVER.

There is no doubt in my mind that had you violated the law though simple absent mindedness, or misunderstanding of the text, there in ZERO doubt in my mind that you would be prosecuted/convicted under the maxim of 'Ignorance of the law is no defense'.

This officer was 'Ignorant' of the law, and should be (and if lady justice is truly blind, WILL be) prosecuted civilly and/or criminally for that error. As the injured party though, it's your decision as to whether to pursue such action.

It is sad that a simple miscomprehention of the text of the law can end a person's career, and possibly ruin the rest of their life in such a manner, but it happens to honest non-LEO's every day...I see no reason why it shouldn't happen to this LEO for his actions in violation your rights. Particularly since it is part of his JOB to know the laws he's enforcing.

18 USC, sec 241, and 242
42 USC, sec 1983

Go get 'em.
 

nick1

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
11
Location
, ,
imported post

SteveO wrote:
rpyne wrote:
marshaul wrote:
It's up to demnogis of course, but this may be a time to let it slide.

The officer didn't try to back out at all. He fully admitted his wrongdoing, and apologized.
I disagree. This is most definitely NOT a time to let it slide. The ONLY way the police in Komifornia, or anywhere else, are every going to get the message is by seeing one of their own lose every penny he has or ever hopes to have, or better yet ends up in prison, for violating the rights of a citizen.

Admitting they were wrong does not negate or excuse the wrongdoing any more than it would for any of us if we were to inadvertently violate the law. If demnogis had "made a mistake" and had a loaded magazine even touching his sidearm, you can bet that he would be sitting in a cell right now no matter how much he admitted his wrongdoing or apologized.

This was not merely an illegal prolonged detention, it was a full fledged false arrest. Nail them to the wall.
I totally disagree! I am not sure which is the better way to go (UOC or CCW). However lawsuits only paint us as money grabbers looking for a quick buck. What I read is at least 3 LEOs getting some continuing education and then with any luck transferring this to their fellow LEOs.
Umm, so? We keep trying to keep up appearances and play nice, but the other side doesn't. Do you think all those open carry PD memos got released because we played nice, or because they were concerned about lawsuits?

In other words, who cares what they think. If because of the lawsuits the officers on the street stop abusing their power and the politicians running the PDs stop abusing their power through policy, I don't see a problem. They don't seem to be stopping to do so otherwise. The only thing this nice "education" does is teaching them how to better get away with abusing the power given to them.
 

smoking357

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
1,100
Location
Pierce is a Coward, ,
imported post

demnogis wrote:
In front of me are two lines of cars. The city is doing a DUI/Sobriety checkpoint - and I just HAD to pick the exit where they're doing this*.

The lines of cars slowly move forward. I took the right lane. As I pulled up I greeted the officers there. One of the officers to my right (officer 2) noticed my firearm, and asked me what it was. I told him that it was my pistol and that it is unloaded. He instructed me to turn off my motorcycle, I complied. I told him I would not interfere if he checked to make sure it was unloaded. He proceeded to unholster my firearm and check that it was, indeed, unloaded. The officer to my left (officer 1) asked "Why are you carrying a pistol?" I responded "As far as I know it is my right to carry a firearm in CA so long as it is unloaded and clearly visible, ie: openly carried. The officer 2 asks officer 1 "Is that right?" Officer 1 responds: "He's right. That is correct. If it's unloaded and openly carried it's ok." He asked me if I had any loaded magazines on me. I told him I have 2 loaded magazines, also in an openly visible holder on my left side. Officer 1 then directed me to pull over into the parking lot to the right so they could check my license, registration, insurance etc. I asked if I should get off and push it, he said no go ahead and drive it over there, officer 2 would meet me over there.

I slowly pulled into a parking stall in the parking lot adjacent to the street, shut off my bike, dismounted and put my bike on the center stand. Right officer asked me to get my driver's license out and I started to. He asked me what was in the case on my back and I told him it was my rifle which was disassembled. He asked me to take it off and set it down. I did, then handed him my license. I told the officer that I also had my voice recorder on me, that it was recording. I was not able to see his badge or nametag at this time. He interrupted and told me that it was illegal for me to be recording our interaction because as an individual he has civil rights too[sup](1)[/sup]. I started to explain that since he is working in his official capacity as a public servant it is not illegal to record our interaction in public. He insisted that it was illegal. He then told me to have a seat on the curb. Not more than a minute goes by and he asks me to stand up again, asks where I have my loaded magazines. I tell him where they are and he pulled them out of the holder and asked me to sit back down.

Shortly thereafter Officer 1 came over to where we were. Officer 2 stands me up and Officer 1 asks me what I was doing coming into his town carrying guns. He tells me that I'm going to jail, tonight, because I had loaded magazines on me. I politely told him that I believed he was wrong, and to check the penal code that applies to the possession of ammunition and a firearm. He insisted that he knew firearms laws better than anyone else in his department. I asked him if I could speak to his seargant. Officer 1 again affirmed that he knows more than his seargant does about firearms laws. I said to him again that there is nothing in the CA penal code that prohibits a person from carrying a firearm and/or ammunition, unless you are a prohibited person[sup](2)[/sup]. I made reference to CA vs. Clark[sup](3)[/sup] and the definition of unloaded 12031[sup](4)[/sup], openly visible firearm (non-concealed) 12025[sup](5)[/sup], locked and unloaded for transport or within a vehicle 12026[sup](6)[/sup]. Officer 1 tells me that I am illegally possessing loaded magazines and a firearm. He again insists that since I'm going to jail tonight, my bike is going to get towed to impound. He tells me to turn around, put my hands behind my back. I ask "Am I being detained?" He responds "You're under arrest."
Checkpoints, wow. Which country isn't freer than the U.S.? England, maybe.

The cop has no more right to ask you why you're carrying a gun than he does to ask you why you're a Methodist.

The rest of your story reinforces what Marshaul described as self-evident, 99% of our problems come at the hands of the police.

Was America ever truly a free country? Just for fun, here's the original Pledge of Allegiance salute. This salute was used from 1892 to 1942.

heil-america.jpg
 

nick1

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
11
Location
, ,
imported post

Even if the officer was ignorant of the law, wouldn't it make sense to detain, learn the law, and then release Demnogis? The officer chose to ARREST him instead. His early attitude fits well with this.

This also leads me to believe that the apology was given in the "lawsuit avoidance" mode, after his sergeant explained a few unfortunate facts of life to him.
 

nick1

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
11
Location
, ,
imported post

smoking357 wrote:
Checkpoints, wow. Which country isn't freer than the U.S.? England, maybe.

The cop has no more right to ask you why you're carrying a gun than he does to ask you why you're a Methodist.

The rest of your story reinforces what Marshaul described as self-evident, 99% of our problems come at the hands of the police.

Was America ever truly a free country? Just for fun, here's the original Pledge of Allegiance salute. This salute was used from 1892 to 1942.

heil-america.jpg

Well, this salute in itself proves nothing. It's a Roman salute to an imperator (or someone highly superior whom you want to flatter, or by populist to the mob). Just because nazis used it doesn't mean it comes from them :)
 

smoking357

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
1,100
Location
Pierce is a Coward, ,
imported post

marshaul wrote:
It's up to demnogis of course, but this may be a time to let it slide.

The officer didn't try to back out at all. He fully admitted his wrongdoing, and apologized.
So? Can I commit a series of crimes if I simply apologize? Let this be a small $10K hit, just to make it sting, a little.
 

smoking357

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
1,100
Location
Pierce is a Coward, ,
imported post

nick1 wrote:
Well, this salute in itself proves nothing. It's a Roman salute to an imperator (or someone highly superior whom you want to flatter, or by populist to the mob). Just because nazis used it doesn't mean it comes from them :)
Of course, not. Nobody would ever suggest we got anything from the Nazis, except for our space program and the Interstate System. Weimar was a young, poor, country, absorbing ideas from around the world, including...

american-swastika-WWII-1929to1932-1941Boeing-P-12-F4B.jpg


Rome conquered Greece and was in turn conquered by it.
 

nick1

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
11
Location
, ,
imported post

I'm not saying we didn't borrow heavy from it. However, I doubt we did it in 1892 :)
 

Giggety-Giggety®

New member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
25
Location
, ,
imported post

Wow, thanks for sharing. This encourages other to UOC and memorize the penal codes. I'm going Open Carry today!!!
 

smoking357

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
1,100
Location
Pierce is a Coward, ,
imported post

nick1 wrote:
I'm not saying we didn't borrow heavy from it. However, I doubt we did it in 1892 :)
Precisely. Bellamy hated the Civil War and wanted to ensure that there would never be another such schism on this continent. The Pledge of Allegiance was drafted to bond all Americans into a single entity, and to one another, and to banish any future thoughts of secession.

We didn't borrow from the Germans until the war ended.

With the fall of the Confederacy, America's course profoundly changed.
 

Johnny_B

Regular Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
144
Location
Gulf Coast, Mississippi, USA
imported post

smoking357 wrote:
nick1 wrote:
I'm not saying we didn't borrow heavy from it. However, I doubt we did it in 1892 :)
Precisely. Bellamy hated the Civil War and wanted to ensure that there would never be another such schism on this continent. The Pledge of Allegiance was drafted to bond all Americans into a single entity, and to one another, and to banish any future thoughts of secession.

We didn't borrow from the Germans until the war ended.

With the fall of the Confederacy, America's course profoundly changed.

Back on topic please, this doesn't have anything to do with the original topic.



I don't think he should sue, the guys e-mailing people and he had a nice conversation afterwords, what kindof message would that send the next time they stop an OCer? "He's going to sue anyway"...
 

SteveO

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
13
Location
Rancho Cucamonga, California, USA
imported post

nick1 wrote:
SteveO wrote:
rpyne wrote:
marshaul wrote:
It's up to demnogis of course, but this may be a time to let it slide.

The officer didn't try to back out at all. He fully admitted his wrongdoing, and apologized.
I disagree. This is most definitely NOT a time to let it slide. The ONLY way the police in Komifornia, or anywhere else, are every going to get the message is by seeing one of their own lose every penny he has or ever hopes to have, or better yet ends up in prison, for violating the rights of a citizen.

Admitting they were wrong does not negate or excuse the wrongdoing any more than it would for any of us if we were to inadvertently violate the law. If demnogis had "made a mistake" and had a loaded magazine even touching his sidearm, you can bet that he would be sitting in a cell right now no matter how much he admitted his wrongdoing or apologized.

This was not merely an illegal prolonged detention, it was a full fledged false arrest. Nail them to the wall.
I totally disagree! I am not sure which is the better way to go (UOC or CCW). However lawsuits only paint us as money grabbers looking for a quick buck. What I read is at least 3 LEOs getting some continuing education and then with any luck transferring this to their fellow LEOs.
Umm, so? We keep trying to keep up appearances and play nice, but the other side doesn't. Do you think all those open carry PD memos got released because we played nice, or because they were concerned about lawsuits?

In other words, who cares what they think. If because of the lawsuits the officers on the street stop abusing their power and the politicians running the PDs stop abusing their power through policy, I don't see a problem. They don't seem to be stopping to do so otherwise. The only thing this nice "education" does is teaching them how to better get away with abusing the power given to them.
Not at all. I am merely discussing this one incident. The OP was arrested and then un-arrested (lmao). Discussions were held about the right to keep and bare arms and these particular LEOs received an education. Does this mean that all stop and abuse should be ignored? No, however in thisinstance it is my belief that a lawsuit could do more damage than good.
 

smoking357

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
1,100
Location
Pierce is a Coward, ,
imported post

Johnny_B wrote:
Back on topic please, this doesn't have anything to do with the original topic.

I don't think he should sue, the guys e-mailing people and he had a nice conversation afterwords, what kindof message would that send the next time they stop an OCer? "He's going to sue anyway"...
He should definitely sue, so the next time, they'll think twice, and there will be an existing verdict on the books for a lawyer to use to ratchet up the penalties.

Hoping to mollify great unknowable masters is what leads to bizarre ritualistic behaviors. Far better to be one's own master and force governmental accountability. At every opportunity, the police must be reminded that they serve, they obey, that they do not interrupt the travels of a freeman without the gravest consideration.

The price of my time and the cost of my freedom is invaluable. How dare anyone intrude lightly upon all that I truly have.

No, there must be no free pass for these crimes.
 

nick1

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
11
Location
, ,
imported post

Johnny_B wrote:
I don't think he should sue, the guys e-mailing people and he had a nice conversation afterwords, what kindof message would that send the next time they stop an OCer? "He's going to sue anyway"...
Not if they don't do something stupid. That's the idea - don't do something bad, you don't get sued. Don't commit a crime - you don't have to worry about being prosecuted. It's that simple.
 

gravedigger

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
221
Location
Franklin, Kentucky, USA
imported post

Sue the living CRAP out of that OFFICER and that DEPARTMENT, and that CITY! Get the newspapers to run a full page story on the OBVIOUS abuse of authority under color of the badge. Call the conservative radio stations and have them tell the story. INSIST that that cop get two weeks off WITHOUT PAY so he has time to go home and study the laws he is enforcing. This sort of thing pisses me off to no end. :cuss::cuss::cuss:
 

gravedigger

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
221
Location
Franklin, Kentucky, USA
imported post

KS_to_CA wrote:
I have a three ring binder in my car with all pertinent documents and sheriffs' memos in clear plastic document protector for clear viewing if an officer decides to believe he knows more than anybody about gun law.
If you live in California, I will pay you to duplicate that binder and send it to me! Just give me your price in a PM and I'll give you the mailing address, and arrange for payment! Make sure you are well compensated for your time!
 

grumpycoconut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
221
Location
The Left Coast, , USA
imported post

bigtoe416 wrote:
virginiatuck wrote:
Maybe his point of it all is that there's nothing wrong with having handguns, loaded magazines, and rifles. And there's nothing wrong with being a gentleman and openly carrying on a polite conversation with some law enforcement officers. :cool:

I think part II will be posted after Sunday, June 21, 2009 at 4:00 PM (PT), when the Piru, CA Appleseed Shoot is over.
I'd gladly be a gentleman to Cato and CrumpyCoconut, two of the police officers on the california board. I'd be more hesitant being a gentleman when dealing with police officers I personally know. I'd be extremely hesitant being a gentleman when dealing with police officers I don't know.

I definitely have respect for a state and its law enforcement officers if one can be open and honest about open carrying without having to worry about arrest. I don't think California is there just yet though.

Thanks Toe!

Just by way of clarification and full disclosure I am not a police now. I were a police once, just not now. As for that whole gentlemanly conduct thing, my take is that being gentlemanly and polite and civil and such is even more important with folks you don't know. It sets a tone for the contact (polite begets polite), it really points out how lousy they are being if they are being lousy, it gives you a stronger position to operate from if you do have to beef and most importantly of all it makes it all the sweeter when you beagle boogie your way out of the station after they realize that you were right and they were not. As a former police I can tell you that cordiality even during (especially during) the most nasty of encounters is a right powerful thing. The whisper forces the screamer to listen.

So how about recording the police when they talk to you. Go for it. It ain't illegal therefore it is legal. The smart ones are recording you. There is no expectation of privacy when talking to a police. There is no way that this can be a legal two way mirror. If they can record, you can too. If they object they do it out of ignorance at bestor at worst,out of the knowledge or fear that they are operating either wrong or with incomplete information.

That junk being said, BE POLITE DAMN IT!!!!! It don't cost you nothin and might buy you the world. Attitude is almost always paid back with attitude.

Now i can go back and read the rest of the thread.
 

grumpycoconut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
221
Location
The Left Coast, , USA
imported post

Demnogis,

I am figuratively jumping up and down with joy reading how they dusted you off and sent you on your way!!!!!

That is one powerful bit of learnin someone did that night. And it wasn't just the guy who wasw wrong but also everyone who works with him. he will be telling this story again and again (albeit sheepishly) for quite some time. Chalk this one up in the win column!!!!
 
Top