Yes officer, I have weapons you need to be aware of

This is a discussion on Yes officer, I have weapons you need to be aware of within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Hopyard Of course if that was the reason, it was an unethical act which violates his oath and duty to seek justice, ...

Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 141

Thread: Yes officer, I have weapons you need to be aware of

  1. #46
    Senior Member Array Rob P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    In the sticks
    Posts
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Of course if that was the reason, it was an unethical act which violates his oath and duty to seek justice, not convictions.

    A recent analysis of the prevalence of "corruption" in various countries put the US in 19th place; behind Australia and Canada which were in 8th, and New Zealand first (that is least corrupt society). Of course a lot of the rest of the world ranked somewhere in the 120 or worse position.

    It is the little day to day things like this that add up.

    I'd call that "technical reason" for moving forward to the Grand Jury, if true, an act of official corruption. You don't need to be taking bribes to do wrong.
    This would be the rule if we all lived in Nirvana. However, in real life people fear for their jobs and have supervisors who are power hungry. Some DA offices do not "let" their assistant DA's make ANY decisions on whether a case should be dismissed or not. In these offices the assistant DA's are TOLD to prosecute (or else) and promotions and pay raises are based on prosecutions/convictions.

    Is this "unethical?" Certainly. However, proving it is impossible because you will need other attorneys to sit in judgment of "the system" and condemn it. This is something that will NEVER happen because "the system" protects itself. This includes the trial courts as well as the appeals courts.

    Any truly honest lawyer will tell you that our justice system has some serious corruption problems. However, they will also tell you that the blame for part of these problems can be laid at the feet of the general public who sit on juries and vote for incompetents on both the bench and legislature. Which is a form of passing the buck because these same lawyers will refuse to point out the ones who are "corrupt" or "incompetent." Perhaps fearing that they themselves will be included in that choosing.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    Ex Member Array Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Rocky River, Ohio
    Posts
    908
    Quote Originally Posted by Landric View Post
    I don't disagree with the sentiment, but the problem is that the incident in question may not have been a false arrest. The statute in Texas is apparently unclear, and it seems that the DA felt there was enough to take the case to the grand jury, which means he felt there was probable cause (which is the standard for arrest). The grand jury didn't agree, but the grand jury is made up of citizens who may or may not know thing one about the law in general or the specific statute in question. Their failure to indict isn't going to hold a lot of water in civil court if the DA in question is willing to testify that in his legal opinion probable cause existed for the arrest.
    I don't know about Texas, but in Ohio and in Chicago, individual LEOs are on the hook for punitive damages. Holding the individual officer responsible for his own actions is the way to rein in abuses. He won't care if somebody else is footing the bill. If the pound of flesh come out of HIS behind, he'll start paying attention to what he's doing and be far less likely to hold a citizen's liberty in contempt.

    If I had to, I'd sell everything I owned to make sure there was a reckoning. The attitude of some LEOs that an innocent citizen's liberty and reputation are of no consequence has to be ruthlessly stamped out.

  4. #48
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,661
    Yes and no about an Ohio LEO being on the hook; you would have to prove a malicious intent to go after him personally. I've been sued plenty of times, but never successfully. Admittedly, each case was pure garbage and thrown out rather quickly.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  5. #49
    VIP Member
    Array TX-JB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sugar Land, TX
    Posts
    5,738
    The real problem with this situation, is the ambiguous statute...IMO it would be almost impossible to prove the officer didn't act in good faith...The officer made the arrest based upon his interpretation of a valid statute and the DA agreed...A good case could actually be made, to validate the arrest, because of the ambiguity of the statute....I know of no court ruling that has determined the definition of a 'chemical dispensing device' any clearer than as printed....
    "Texas can make it without the United States, but the United States can't make it without Texas!".... Sam Houston

    Retired LEO
    Firearms Instructor
    NRA Life Member

  6. #50
    Ex Member Array Treo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,098
    Treo's first law of police interaction: If you talk to a cop long enough you will say something he can use against you

    If I were stopped on the street and questioned by a police officer the very first words out of my mouth would be "Officer am I free to leave." This question establishes the status of the contact immediately, and tells you exactly how to proceed. If you are told you are free to go do so immediately, Thank you officer have a good day. Do not say another word.

    If the officer tells you, you are not free to go you can rest assured that he suspects you of something and is looking for probable cause to make an arrest. This also establishes the contact as official.

    If you are being detained the less you say the better, if the officer has probable cause he's going to arrest you no matter what you say. If he doesn't the easiest way for him to get it is for you to open your mouth. If asked where my weapon is I would answer directly and refuse comment on all other questions. "Officer I do not wish to make a statement or answer questions without my lawyer present" He can't keep you there for ever & if he had PC you'd already be in handcuffs. No matter what he asks you (exception questions directly related to where your firearm is) ask to speak to your lawyer before answering the question.

    But Treo I don't have anything to hide. See Rule 1

  7. #51
    Ex Member Array Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Rocky River, Ohio
    Posts
    908
    Quote Originally Posted by SIXTO View Post
    Yes and no about an Ohio LEO being on the hook; you would have to prove a malicious intent to go after him personally. I've been sued plenty of times, but never successfully. Admittedly, each case was pure garbage and thrown out rather quickly.
    Is it really malicious intent or is it being outside of the normal scope of your duties?

    Arrest the wrong person for a real crime because of mistaken identity, reasonable belief due to circumstances, etc. - Normal scope

    Arrest somebody for something that you know or SHOULD know is not a crime - Not normal scope

    Of course a lot of the gun related false arrests seem to involve statements against penal interest by the cops involved, "I don't CARE what the law says!", "I'll make something up!", etc. Cops can talk themselves into a bind too, especially in states that only require one party consent for recording.

    Police arrest the wrong people for real crimes all of the time. The ONLY excuse for arresting somebody for something that's NOT a crime is not knowing and asking a superior who orders a false arrest. If you do that, you've still committed a false arrest, but you took what APPEAR to be reasonable steps to avoid the harm to the victim.

    Simply not knowing or not caring isn't an excuse. It certainly isn't for a citizen. "I didn't know I couldn't carry into Chipotle." won't last five seconds in criminal court.

  8. #52
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,041
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    "I didn't know I couldn't carry into Chipotle." won't last five seconds in criminal court.
    "But ... but ... I didn't know I couldn't carry there." Slap 'im in irons.

    "But ... but ... I didn't know he didn't do anything wrong and that arresting him was false." Oh, okay. That's fine. Don't do it again. Nevermind the $6500 in fines, attorney fees and whatnot in order to get the irons removed and the charges thwarted.

    Got to love it, sometimes.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  9. #53
    Ex Member Array Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Rocky River, Ohio
    Posts
    908
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    "But ... but ... I didn't know I couldn't carry there." Slap 'im in irons.

    "But ... but ... I didn't know he didn't do anything wrong and that arresting him was false." Oh, okay. That's fine. Don't do it again. Nevermind the $6500 in fines, attorney fees and whatnot in order to get the irons removed and the charges thwarted.

    Got to love it, sometimes.
    As I said to somebody else, it appears to me that some LEOs are so used to dealing with people who literally LIVE in "the system" that they act like they're incapable of comprehending that there are people who want NOTHING to do with "the system" and who are genuinely offended by being wrongfully dragged through its mechanisms. It's as if the deprivation of a citizen's liberty and good name mean nothing... however if a cop takes a huge financial hit for wrongfully inflicting that deprivation because he either didn't know or didn't care about the law, somehow that's "unjust" or "disproportionate".

  10. #54
    Member Array Dihappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    272
    This is ridiculous!

    I emailed the Mayor and i suggest everyone do the same.

    eric.hogue@wylietexas.gov
    "...trying to get a long gun into play while someone is all over you like a monkey eating a cupcake is not very conducive to good survival techniques." ~Bark'n

  11. #55
    Member Array JungleJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So. Fla
    Posts
    311
    Quote Originally Posted by walrusjax View Post
    He was a retired LEO and said that Officers are the WORST at knowing the laws for carrying.

    He also said that if you have a permit, it is tied to your tags now so as soon as they run your plates, they already know.
    The second statement proves the first.
    CCW info in Fla is not tied to the tags. They won't know unless they are informed. I do agree that it is a good idea to tell them rather the 'surprise' them,

  12. #56
    Senior Member Array Landric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kansas City Metro
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by Dihappy View Post
    This is ridiculous!

    I emailed the Mayor and i suggest everyone do the same.

    eric.hogue@wylietexas.gov
    That is great. The problem is that no one posting to this thread appears to have any more information about this incident other than a poorly written and fact checked article. I have no idea whether the officers in question were right or wrong. The article implies that they acted in an unreasonable manner, but given the inaccurate and biased way that the media covers gun owners, I'm surprised that we, as a group, seem to take anything they say and accurate and evenhanded.
    -Landric

    "The Engine could still smile...it seemed to scare them" -Felix

  13. #57
    Member Array Kenny256's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Bolivar MO
    Posts
    342
    Dont officers only have the right to deal witht he problem they pulled you over for?

    After he proved ownership I would have said have a nice day!

    And maybe the officer was just trying to show off to his police chief?
    Carry-S&W 642
    HD-Remington 870

    The Dalai Lama:"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun."

  14. #58
    VIP Member Array Tom G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    2,375
    An over zealous LE can ruin somebody's life due to not being familiar with the law. Sometimes the law is very unfair when it comes to the law abiding citizen. I think the state should pay Jason's legal bills and be responsible for any damage caused by the police due to a lack of knowledge about the law.

  15. #59
    Senior Member Array rljohns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,033
    I have only had one person ask me if I had any weapons and that was the Canadian Border patol back in 1981. I ask what kind of weapons and he rattled off any fours things and I said none of those. He said proceed and that was that. I never have cops ask me if I have any weapons when they pull me over. I gues I would say "What did you ,miss the USMC tags?" LOL. No I would be that much os a smart a$$.

  16. #60
    Member Array sleepyhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    Officers can't know everything. Seriously, look at the penal code for a city/state/county/etc. It's freaking massive. Cops arent lawyers. I understand that it is hard to enforce the law if one does not KNOW the law but they can't be expected to know ALL of the law. That's what judges and lawyers are for.
    This argument really PISSES me off! You are willing to give the officer a break because there are so many laws, there's no way a poor police officer can know them all. Maybe if the LEO in this case would have spent 5 minutes researching the law, rather than 40 minutes depriving this law abiding citizen of his liberty, the whole mess could have been avoided.

    We as citizens are required to know the law, why the aren't the LEO required to know the law???!!!???

Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Are we really aware of our surroundings?
    By paramedic70002 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: December 31st, 2009, 12:58 AM
  2. Question About Staying Aware
    By blinkstafoo1 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: August 24th, 2008, 03:28 PM
  3. Police Officer & Wife Arrested on Federal Weapons & Drug Charges
    By Cthulhu in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: July 23rd, 2008, 01:27 AM
  4. Pale yellow, or being aware you're not being aware???
    By Tangle in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: October 5th, 2005, 12:52 PM

Search tags for this page

ad for concealed weapons permit in crockett texas will not teach liberals

,

become a texas game warden oc spray

,

did jason simpkins get his record expu

,

do i have to show a police officer my permit to carry a weapon

,

do i need to make a police officer aware of my concealed weapon if he enters my place of business?

,

do you have to show your weapon to a police officer if asked?

,

florida law, cops took legally owned gun and concealed weapon permit, no arrest, no information taken, no i'd asked for

,

jason simpkins of wylie, texas

,

karolyna obrycka

,

reidk5

,

tell officer you have wepon

,

texas officer asks if you have any weapons

Click on a term to search for related topics.