Exercise our rights within the confines of the law. This is the only way to gain a redress of wrongs when a thug cop subjects the citizen to unlawful acts under the color of law.Never said all cops are good, unlike your obvious blind bias against them. The bottom line is, most people are good and reasonable, and that applies to police as well as to those of us who carry. When we know our rights and exercise them accurately, politely and respectfully, I believe that most of us will not have a problem with LEOs. Engage in immediate belligerence and the situation will deteriorate quickly.
The citizen's demeanor only has weight for a cop who, 1) knows the law regarding firearms in his jurisdiction, 2) understands liberty, and 3) respects rights.<snip> My point is that being polite and non-combative while refusing to answer questions can help to avoid the ride.
Exercise our rights within the confines of the law. This is the only way to gain a redress of wrongs when a thug cop subjects the citizen to unlawful acts under the color of law.
A cop's authority must be challenged (in a polite and non-combative manner) at every step of a detention (and yes, I believe a cop stops you - you are detained) and he must be made to justify his acts under statute. I engage in "verbal jujitsu" only to assist the cop in not making a career impacting decision. And, only if I think the cop is open to being "educated" right then and there. Most cops are not and do not appreciate mundanes "teaching" them on the side of the road. This is where I attempt to get a judge to do my teaching for me.
In MO I am compelled to display my "permit" upon demand. It does not state that I must hand over my "permit." But, I am only so required if I am presently armed and concealing while armed. If I am OC, in a political subdivision that does not make OC unlawful, I am under no obligation to inform the cop I am armed or answer the question. The citizen must know the law regarding being armed.
The citizen's demeanor only has weight for a cop who, 1) knows the law regarding firearms in his jurisdiction, 2) understands liberty, and 3) respects rights.
Unfortunately the "trifecta" of knowledge is a rare occurrence in your average beat cop. Getting two out of three is more the case.
A copied bit of random information from someone's website can't be considered to be a representation of the actual law and that an actual reference to the law (Chapter and Verse) is?"... I'm actually coming to the conclusion its just pulled from the firearms FAQS on the state website. Obviously that isn't a chapter and section so I have no idea where they get out from...."
Keep in mind there are no statutes to be polite. As far as I know it is not illegal to be blunt, if it is please cite?
Of course there is no statute and no one can force you to be polite or to avoid being blunt. In my opinion, however, starting out as a rational and polite person can help to prevent the situation from escalating into something more than it might have become. If you start out that way and the officer turns unnecessarily hostile, then when or if it gets to court you will be seen as the more reasonable person -- especially if you are recording the encounter. You DO keep an audio or video record of all encounters, yes?
It cannot LEGALLY escalate unless a law is broken! Show me cites of cases where individuals were convicted of "contempt of cop"?
Where some cops are concerned, legally and lawfully are theoretical concepts that have little bearing on the mean streets. The law is what they think it is at that moment and telling them at that moment that they are wrong can be very dangerous to the uppity citizen. I'll let my barrister do my talking and educating for me.
As to cops being human, sure they are, just not in uniform, they are professionals and I hold, what some may think is, a excessively high expectation regarding cops and how they perform their duties.
Polite is good when the cop earns polite.....I prefer circumspect.
1200+ posts?:shocker: In just 3 months on OCDO!? Even davidmcbeth would have trouble keeping up with that!
I agree completely, I just have a problem with statists who think that citizens should cower in the presence of a LEO. Whether they get away with it sometimes does not change it is illegal to arrest a person for a made up crime, just because that person did not kiss their ass.
Those 1200 posts look like the index to the book of "Intellectual Dishonesty Through Logical Fallacies Meets Animal Farm II".
I am hoping that you are not calling me a "statist" nor that are you suggesting that being polite and non-confrontational at the outset of an encounter is somehow to be regarded as "cowering." There is a lot of "broad-brushing" and binary thinking evident on this forum -- all cops are bad, all who take a moderate approach at the outset of an encounter are statists, etc.
In regards to IC 35-47-2-24, I'd recommend anyone who could afford to take a day off from work refuse to produce his/her license and then show up in court. If enough people did it, it would prove uneconomical (both cost and manpower) for the state to continue to bring such matters for court. The likely outcome in such cases the county solicitor would immediately seek nolle prosequi for the charges.
Failing that, the officer gets to waste his time in court for an afternoon instead of having to face the hazards of meeting and arresting criminals.
It's a win-win situation either way.
I have no problem with anything you have written. My whole intent in my posting is that I start from the premise that a police officer is a human being with a job to do and I will be polite and non-combative until and unless the officer attempts to abridge my rights. If they do, I will exercise the advice I have been given by my attorney -- "Am I being detained?" If so, "I will not answer any questions without the advice of my attorney, and I do not consent to any searches or seizures of my person, papers or property." "Am I now free to go?" If that gets me a ride, so be it and I'll save my arguments for the court case, letting my attorney handle it.
I think that the knee-jerk reaction of some who are instantly combative can lead to an unnecessary heightening of the confrontation.
If you think about it, a LAC can no lower the level of confrontation, but the LEO can. A LEO can heighten the level of confrontation and the LAC can do nothing about it. So who's the actor? Who's in control. Not you.