"Packing Heat" - OC Lawsuit in GA

mzmtg · December 18th, 2008, 06:28 AM

Metro Spirit: Richmond County - Packing heat

Quote:

Packing heat

If you have a license, it’s not against the law to carry a gun. Even if you’re accompanied by a man wearing a sombrero.

BY ERIC JOHNSON

AUGUSTA, GA - In a settlement filed in District Court on Dec. 4, the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office admitted violating an Augusta man’s Fourth Amendment rights by seizing and holding his firearm.

The settlement brings closure to a bizarre case that is equal parts highbrow constitutional philosophy and lowbrow absurdity.

According to information contained in the consent order, a Richmond County Sheriff’s deputy was making a routine patrol of the Kroger parking lot on Washington Road when he was waved down by a customer who indicated a man carrying a firearm was inside the store acting in a bizarre and obnoxious manner.

This is where things go from “Perry Mason” to “Pee-Wee Herman.” Quoting from the report: “[the deputy] was informed that this individual was accompanied by another man wearing a sombrero and carrying a guitar.”

Zach Mead, the man with the gun, vehemently denies the allegation.

“It was a banjo,” he insists.

That’s the thing about this case. It’s not normal.

Zach Mead is not, in the strictest sense, normal. He’s military, yes, but he’s also a liberally tattooed free spirit who has friends who wear sombreros and play banjos in checkout aisles.

He also openly carries a Beretta 92 Steel-I in a holster on his hip.

Which is legal, by the way.

Maybe it’s a matter of perception, or maybe it matters whether or not you’re the one wearing the holster, but Mead has a different take on the Kroger incident than the report.

“I can understand why people might think we were kind of strange,” he says, “but it’s not against the law to be different.”

He’s right, after all. It’s not a crime to be different, and if you’re a licensed gun owner, it’s not a crime to openly carry your gun in public, either.

“Simply put, a police officer needs reasonable suspicion of a crime before he can detain someone, and merely possessing a handgun is not reasonable suspicion of a crime,” says Ed Stone, president of the gun rights group georgiacarry.org and co-counsel for Mead. “In this case, the encounter went beyond merely detaining Zachary Mead for having a handgun; the deputy in this case actually seized the handgun and took it with him.”

Because most people, including some gun owners, are unaware that a Georgia firearms license (GFL) grants you the right to openly carry a firearm, a perception exists that the gun laws are ambiguous. Stone disagrees.

“I don’t think it’s ambiguous at all,” he says. “You can carry a firearm openly or concealed in the State of Georgia with a firearms license. That’s very clear, and I think 99 percent of officers are perfectly clear on the subject.”

Though now an attorney specializing in construction law, Stone himself was a police officer for 12 years.

“We are experiencing a small problem with a small minority of officers around the State of Georgia,” he says. “Hopefully, these lawsuits will get the word out and clear that up for whatever officers may remain unclear on that.”

Stone and georgiacarry.org made a name for themselves earlier this year when they took on Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport’s threat to arrest Georgia firearms license holders for lawfully carrying firearms in non-secure areas of the airport.

“In this case, the most aggravating factor in our eyes was the fact that the gun was confiscated and kept for a long period of time, even when the plaintiff tried to get it back,” Stone says. “And that was after the officer knew that Zachary Mead had a firearms license and after the officer knew that Zachary Mead was a member of the United States military.”

In Georgia, having a military ID gives you the same exceptions as a police officer, so Stone contends seizing Mead’s firearm is no different than seizing a firearm from a police officer.

James Ellison, who handled the case for the sheriff’s office, sees it a little differently. Though he admits the deputy may have overstepped his authority, he thinks it was for good reason.

Ellison maintains the officer thought he smelled alcohol on Mead’s breath. That, combined with reports of his odd behavior and the fact that he was purchasing alcohol, caused him to err on the side of caution and seize the gun.

“I think the officer technically should not have done that, but I don’t think you can be too hard on the officer,” he says. “He’s thinking of the safety of the person carrying the gun and those about town.”

To Mead, Stone and georgiacarry.org, however, this case is a Second Amendment issue wrapped up in a Fourth Amendment wrapper.

The Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms. The Fourth Amendment guarantees the right against unreasonable search and seizure.

“If police officers can forcibly detain people any time they see them with a firearm, then the Second Amendment would cease to exist,” Stone says. “How can you bear arms if every police officer who sees you can stop you and detain you?”

By settling out of court, Ellison saves the county the embarrassment of a trial and, potentially, quite a lot of money.

“We agreed to settle it because, technically, we felt the officer made the wrong call,” he says, pointing out that had Mead won even a token judgment from a jury, the county would have had to foot Mead’s attorney fees, which would have been considerable.

Though the settlement awarded Mead $1,000 in damages and over $3,000 in attorney fees, Mead’s frustration with the way the situation was handled remains high, and he disputes the allegations that he’d been drinking.

“That part about me drinking was totally untrue,” he says. “He [the deputy] made that up after the fact to try to cover his ass. Over the course of the whole thing, he never said anything about me smelling like alcohol, nor did he ask me if I’d been drinking. He never asked me.”

Sticks · December 18th, 2008, 06:52 AM

I REALLY wish these people would quit settling. We need the police and public to get the message loud and clear.

No need to sue the department into bankruptcy, just get a judgment, expenses, and the publicity.

rmodel65 · December 18th, 2008, 09:47 AM

My brother has an incident of arrest here in GA, all for legally possessing a legal firearm. We will see where this goes. :(

archer51 · December 18th, 2008, 10:43 AM

Quote:

In Georgia, having a military ID gives you the same exceptions as a police officer, so Stone contends seizing Mead’s firearm is no different than seizing a firearm from a police officer.

I think they may be stretching it on this. I may be wrong, but I think the exception applys to a military issued weapon, not a privately owned weapon. If it applys to anyone with a military ID, that would not only be active duty military, but reserves, national guard and retirees as well.

Mxyzptlk · December 18th, 2008, 11:12 AM

It's clear that the officer made the wrong call. The whole thing could have been defused by returning the man's gun after admitting and apologizing for the error. Cops are not perfect, I don't see why they act as if they are.

And if the cop actually lied about the alcohol on Mead's breath, then it's really bad. That would be a reflection on the officer's integrity. And his department's.

Very well written article by Johnson, I might add.

Finally, I notice the lawyer always gets priority in getting compensation...

rmodel65 · December 18th, 2008, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by archer51

I think they may be stretching it on this. I may be wrong, but I think the exception applys to a military issued weapon, not a privately owned weapon. If it applys to anyone with a military ID, that would not only be active duty military, but reserves, national guard and retirees as well.

it is not stretching it one bit, the laws states : (3) Persons in the military service of the state or of the United States;

This includes, US(active and reserve), GA National Guard and members of the GA defense force

the code section doesn't mandate any specific weapons be used.

Frogbones · December 18th, 2008, 12:06 PM

If you are a LEO and you represent the law, uphold the law, I think LEO's should be well informed of the laws and quized or the like. That they know and understand certain (mainly regarding the possesion of firearms) law..to me that is proactive..(most police culture is reactive) instead of people haveing rights trampled, inconvienenced do to the lack of understanding of laws...escpecially the ones regarding firearms.

I'm not even near police material...but I've taken apon myself to know and understand the laws regarding handgun possesion...even though that won't matter when dealing with an officer who is confident that they think they know the law....and I end up arrested, weapon seized, wife upset..all cause that officer FAILED to understand the law regarding possesion of firearms.

Thinking you know the law and actually knowing the law are two COMPLETELY different things.

jahwarrior72 · December 18th, 2008, 07:24 PM

this Mead fellow seems like a guy i'd hang out with. i appreciate absurdity.

TN_Mike · December 18th, 2008, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sticks

I REALLY wish these people would quit settling. We need the police and public to get the message loud and clear.

No need to sue the department into bankruptcy, just get a judgment, expenses, and the publicity.

+1000 I really want someone to take a state on and really hand them their butt for this kind of thing.

Right Wing Wacko · December 19th, 2008, 02:40 AM

Quote:

AUGUSTA, GA - In a settlement filed in District Court on Dec. 4, the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office admitted violating an Augusta man’s Fourth Amendment rights by seizing and holding his firearm.

There is the important part!

Usually they try to avoid admitting any wrongdoing.

Sticks · December 19th, 2008, 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Right Wing Wacko

There is the important part!

Usually they try to avoid admitting any wrongdoing.

4th amendment says nothing about the right to keep and bear arms. That one was violated first and foremost, and not even mentioned by the police, just the reporter.

mac140au · December 19th, 2008, 10:30 AM

Good ol' GeorgiaCarry.org. Membership is worth every penny. I invested money into the McCain Campaign which turned out to be a poor investment. I also invested money into Georgia Carry and everytime I read stories like this I get a little return on investment. Thanks GeorgiaCarry.

devo1123 · December 21st, 2008, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jahwarrior72

this Mead fellow seems like a guy i'd hang out with. i appreciate absurdity.

If you ever make it to Augusta from the raggedy edge hit me up. We like to have a good time here.

To the people who wished we wouldn't have settled:

There were extenuating circumstances that would've made going to trial end up with the same result.

Sticks · December 21st, 2008, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by devo1123

If you ever make it to Augusta from the raggedy edge hit me up. We like to have a good time here.

To the people who wished we wouldn't have settled:

There were extenuating circumstances that would've made going to trial end up with the same result.

Welcome to the forum.

Are you under a non disclosure agreement under the settlement?

If not, we would reeeealy like to hear the whole thing first person.

retsupt99 · December 21st, 2008, 03:54 PM

I always thought ignorance of the law was no excuse...doesn't that apply equally to LEO's?

If there are extenuating circumstances...which to me means the defendant did do something wrong

...then the case need to be settled with less paperwork. However, if the defendant was completely in the right, he should have continued the suit for a major impact on such 'ingorance'. That's the only time that those, who are supposed to be following the law, really grow from their experiences.
OMO

Stay armed..."Si Senior"...stay safe!

LongRider · January 5th, 2009, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by retsupt99

If there are extenuating circumstances...which to me means the defendant did do something wrong

...

Lots of extenuating circumstances that would have a plaintive settle that has nothing to do with the plaintive doing anything wrong. Like your CO ripping you a new one and making you wish you would die and go to hell if you pursue the lawsuit. Or a wife father mother brother sister in law boss with the same attitude for whatever reason. Other than that I agree blatant abuse like this needs to be taxed and the abusers need to find other careers that do not involve the public trust

DMan · January 5th, 2009, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sticks

4th amendment says nothing about the right to keep and bear arms. That one was violated first and foremost, and not even mentioned by the police, just the reporter.

No, it doesn't its search and seizure - in this case they seized something that happened to be a gun.... like they siad 2nd ammendment wrapped up in the 4th. That is a good description of this.

devo1123 · January 19th, 2009, 09:23 AM

Sorry I didn't make it back sooner. Please see Firearm Discussion :: View topic - HELP!!! Just had pistol confiscated while lawfully OC'ING!

and

GeorgiaCarry.org Sues Sheriff for Detaining & Seizing Gun of Open Carrier - Georgia - Stories From The States - OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum

Packing heat

I was definitely not in the wrong, the extenuating circumstances had to do with the deputies financial situation. Because the Department didn't have a "written" policy and denied this was their custom we could only go after that deputy... and he was in bankruptcy... so we'd have had to go through that. In any case, it wasn't about the money for me. Sure, everyone would like more money, including me, but we got the decision we were going for and I'm happy. If it happens again... I'm sure it wouldn't be pretty. That's the point... to keep it from happening again.

My command was actually very supportive, they just wanted to know if I needed help getting my gun back. Someone tried to discourage me from stirring the hornets nest but I wasn't gonna take this one lying down, no way, no how. Luckily GCO stepped up and kicked some butt.

Thanks for all of your support, truly appreciated.

Stay safe, stay second amendment... or fourth in this case.

rmodel65 · January 21st, 2009, 11:03 AM

Denied:1up! Software ()

mentions the lawsuit win of GCO

December 18th, 2008, 06:52 AM	#2
Sticks Distinguished Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,694	I REALLY wish these people would quit settling. We need the police and public to get the message loud and clear. No need to sue the department into bankruptcy, just get a judgment, expenses, and the publicity. __________________ Sticks Curiosity was framed, poor judgment killed the cat A Government is comprised of a body of people notably ungoverned Three can keep a secret if two are dead

December 18th, 2008, 09:47 AM	#3
rmodel65 Senior Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: brunswick Posts: 651	My brother has an incident of arrest here in GA, all for legally possessing a legal firearm. We will see where this goes. :( __________________ S&W M&P40 Kel-tec p11 CZ-52 www.georgiacarry.org member

December 18th, 2008, 12:06 PM	#7
Frogbones Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Up in Texas Posts: 543	If you are a LEO and you represent the law, uphold the law, I think LEO's should be well informed of the laws and quized or the like. That they know and understand certain (mainly regarding the possesion of firearms) law..to me that is proactive..(most police culture is reactive) instead of people haveing rights trampled, inconvienenced do to the lack of understanding of laws...escpecially the ones regarding firearms. I'm not even near police material...but I've taken apon myself to know and understand the laws regarding handgun possesion...even though that won't matter when dealing with an officer who is confident that they think they know the law....and I end up arrested, weapon seized, wife upset..all cause that officer FAILED to understand the law regarding possesion of firearms. Thinking you know the law and actually knowing the law are two COMPLETELY different things. __________________ Progress, not perfection. triple tap "think triangle - nipple to nipple to Adam's apple. The hope is that at least two of the three will make serious contact with a major organ or the spine." http://theshootersclub.com/

December 18th, 2008, 07:24 PM	#8
jahwarrior72 Distinguished Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: the raggedy edge Posts: 1,324	this Mead fellow seems like a guy i'd hang out with. i appreciate absurdity. __________________ *i...drink...your...milkshake!!!* http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm...endid=19644781

December 19th, 2008, 10:30 AM	#12
mac140au Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Bethlehem, GA Posts: 19	Good ol' GeorgiaCarry.org. Membership is worth every penny. I invested money into the McCain Campaign which turned out to be a poor investment. I also invested money into Georgia Carry and everytime I read stories like this I get a little return on investment. Thanks GeorgiaCarry. __________________ Exercise your 2nd Amendment Right, buy a gun. www.GeorgiaCarry.org

December 18th, 2008, 11:12 AM	#5
Mxyzptlk Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Fairview Posts: 147	It's clear that the officer made the wrong call. The whole thing could have been defused by returning the man's gun after admitting and apologizing for the error. Cops are not perfect, I don't see why they act as if they are. And if the cop actually lied about the alcohol on Mead's breath, then it's really bad. That would be a reflection on the officer's integrity. And his department's. Very well written article by Johnson, I might add. Finally, I notice the lawyer always gets priority in getting compensation...

December 21st, 2008, 03:54 PM	#15
retsupt99 VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Central Florida Posts: 24,674	I always thought ignorance of the law was no excuse...doesn't that apply equally to LEO's? If there are extenuating circumstances...which to me means the defendant did do something wrong...then the case need to be settled with less paperwork. However, if the defendant was completely in the right, he should have continued the suit for a major impact on such 'ingorance'. That's the only time that those, who are supposed to be following the law, really grow from their experiences. OMO Stay armed..."Si Senior"...stay safe! __________________ "That I cannot do." "Give this to, uh, Clemenza. I want reliable people, people who aren't going to be carried away. After all we're not murderers in spite of what this undertaker thinks." *********************************** NRA Life Member

January 19th, 2009, 09:23 AM	#18
devo1123 New Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Dark side of the moon Posts: 3	Sorry I didn't make it back sooner. Please see Firearm Discussion :: View topic - HELP!!! Just had pistol confiscated while lawfully OC'ING! and GeorgiaCarry.org Sues Sheriff for Detaining & Seizing Gun of Open Carrier - Georgia - Stories From The States - OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum Packing heat I was definitely not in the wrong, the extenuating circumstances had to do with the deputies financial situation. Because the Department didn't have a "written" policy and denied this was their custom we could only go after that deputy... and he was in bankruptcy... so we'd have had to go through that. In any case, it wasn't about the money for me. Sure, everyone would like more money, including me, but we got the decision we were going for and I'm happy. If it happens again... I'm sure it wouldn't be pretty. That's the point... to keep it from happening again. My command was actually very supportive, they just wanted to know if I needed help getting my gun back. Someone tried to discourage me from stirring the hornets nest but I wasn't gonna take this one lying down, no way, no how. Luckily GCO stepped up and kicked some butt. Thanks for all of your support, truly appreciated. Stay safe, stay second amendment... or fourth in this case.

January 21st, 2009, 11:03 AM	#19
rmodel65 Senior Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: brunswick Posts: 651	Denied:1up! Software () mentions the lawsuit win of GCO __________________ S&W M&P40 Kel-tec p11 CZ-52 www.georgiacarry.org member

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode