Concealed Permit Holder cuffed for officers "safety"

[mcgyver210]

My biggest problem with this is he was not locked in her cruiser right. He was hand cuffed in an office correct? What if the bg's were there and either got the officer or came out of hiding and saw the owener cuffed and helpless and cause him harm?

From what I read he was left outside but maybe I didn't read it correctly. They probably would have given her a commendation if the civilian owner was shot while handcuffed/detained for her not his safety since he wasn't actually under arrest.

On a side note I have had the local PD to my house a few times while OC & they haven't even asked if I had a HCP although I know they seen my Glock on my waist.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[lance22]

By the people, of the people, for the people? I guess not. Fed is large and in charge and they want you to know it.

[Thanis]

...However, I've had police officers respond to my home a few times at my request. In none of those situations have I ever informed them...

Same. and I'm 100% in MI what is or is not legal. I've called LEO 2 times to my home. Once it involved an issue outside my property line (I was a witness to something after the fact that did not involve me, be warrented me calling LEO. Officer was confused when he asked if I would come out to the street to talk to another witness. I informed him I declined and wanted to stay on my property. He asked why? I stated one reason was my safety. That was not the top reason, but I did not want to inform him I was armed, or inform my neighbor (also just a witness) he was with that I was armed.

I'm not sure if it mattered, just what I did.

...officers don't have to Mirandize you when you are arrested!! They only have to advise you of your Rights before a custodial interrogation! If they saw you commit an offense and don't ever question you about it, they don't have to Mirandize...

As I understand it, the mirandizing is just how they CYA if you spill the beans...they don't "have to" do it, but not doing it can make anything thing they learn from your statements inadmissible. There are seperate laws as to how long and under what situations you can be detained before charged.

[razor02097]

My biggest problem with this is he was not locked in her cruiser right. He was hand cuffed in an office correct? What if the bg's were there and either got the officer or came out of hiding and saw the owener cuffed and helpless and cause him harm?

she made the BG job easier

I'm not really sure what he could do if he was harmed while detained...I guess file a suit against the city?

[Pikachu711]

I've read this same story in the Las Vegas Review Journal. As far as I can recall from the Nevada group the LVMPD officer was a female rookie police officer. The CCW pemitee was handcuffed outside his OWN business while the officer waited for back-up officers were enroute.

Appalling to say the least. I don't want to imagine what would have happened if the BG had exited the business. The rookie officer would have been safe. The CCW permitee would be a "sitting duck" to say the least!

I also recall reading somewhere that this was the FOURTH break-in into his business. This was the primary motivation for applying his CCW permit.

[mcgyver210]

Appalling to say the least. I don't want to imagine what would have happened if the BG had exited the business. The rookie officer would have been safe. The CCW permitee would be a "sitting duck" to say the least!

Most likely scenario would be the officer hiding behind her cruiser & the owner being injured for her safety.

[Eagleks]

An officer got shot here and kiled, from a 'fake' call. I think if she had taken the gun and had control of it, there was no reason for the handcuffs. The handcuff part is what I have an issue with here.

[gottabkiddin]

I have been cuffed and detained before the whole ccw thing was a law here in kansas. Another patrol car pulled up with a woman passenger that said '' no he's not the guy'' and i was released. i would guess they do it for safety reasons.

That's messed up right there.

[miklcolt45]

I've read this same story in the Las Vegas Review Journal. As far as I can recall from the Nevada group the LVMPD officer was a female rookie police officer. The CCW pemitee was handcuffed outside his OWN business while the officer waited for back-up officers were enroute.

Appalling to say the least. I don't want to imagine what would have happened if the BG had exited the business. The rookie officer would have been safe. The CCW permitee would be a "sitting duck" to say the least!

I also recall reading somewhere that this was the FOURTH break-in into his business. This was the primary motivation for applying his CCW permit.

The article says it was the 5th time the business had been broken into.

[akapjr]

Why did he tell the officer he was cc?Is it a law in that state that you must inform while on foot?Does not make any sense.

[LongRider]

The business owner and author appear to be good friends and whether it was done intentionally or not, this article came across as being written by someone who was mad at the way his friend was treated and not written objectively.

It is an editorial by definition an opinion. The author made it very clear this was a friend of his. Is it biased towards freedom loving liberty loving Americans maybe I know the part I liked best is.

The cops don't get it. The Constitution does not say "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed unless such infringement makes an officer of the government feel safer." The biggest reason the American populace are armed was never to fight off bears or wild Indians but to make agents of the government feel unsafe -- really, really unsafe -- should they try to take away our rights. That's why a citizen militia is "necessary to the security of a free state."

If these arrogant, uniformed employees of ours really want to treat us as the enemy, they may eventually get their wish, at which point they will discover they're vastly outnumbered -- and "backup" is never quite close enough to solve the problem they've created for themselves.

IMO ALL public Servants need to very afraid of the enemies they create. They are not special, they are not above anyone. They need to learn their place. Their place is as our SERVANTS. If they are not OK with that fact they need to find other work because they are unworthy of the trust given them. There are lots of good honorable people who are more than capable of proudly being of service to their community.

[cwblanco]

Wow, I know that in Texas a LEO can disarm you, but handcuff you with out reading your rights?

The purpose of "reading the rights" is avoid improperly taking confessions or statements. Having defended several civil rights lawsuit, I will tell you that if the subject is not being interrogated, there is no requirement to read the subject his rights, whether or not he is under arrest or handcuffed. That is a common misception held by many members of the public that we have to deal with in every case.

[OR Hillbilly]

This does not apply if you are an enlisted person and/or have been deemed to be a terrorist, to which then all civilian rights and legal expectations go out the window.

I am pretty sure that terrorists are granted rights here now. Look at the underwear bomber. Didn't they mirandaize him and then he clammed up? Probably go ahead and decide the constitution applies to non-citizen terror suspects and allow them to invoke the 5th amendment during their trial... Which will be held in a civilian (read: Non-military )court....

May as well hand them a social security card and some free Obama money as soon as their attack attempt has run it's course.

"Nice try on blowing up that plane... Better luck next time" "Here you go, here are your citizenship documents and first assistance check." "Your court-appointed attorney will be here shortly." "Sorry about the Navy SEALs and that fat lip they will be dealt with."

Ok, done ranting... Something tells me that this post might get me in trouble.... Oops.

[ccman]

Maybe she was looking for something ?. I hope she finds it.

[GWRedDragon]

The purpose of "reading the rights" is avoid improperly taking confessions or statements. Having defended several civil rights lawsuit, I will tell you that if the subject is not being interrogated, there is no requirement to read the subject his rights, whether or not he is under arrest or handcuffed. That is a common misception held by many members of the public that we have to deal with in every case.

This. The police must 'read you your rights' if and only if they plan to take action that they should reasonably believe could elicit a confession (aka questioning), and if you are being arrested or could reasonably believe you are being arrested.