Gun Bearer Has Pointed Discussion With Police Officer - Page 8

punk rocka · October 18th, 2009, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Majorlk

Hogwash!

In most states, unless an officer has a reasonable suspicion someone has committed a crime, they cannot be compelled to identify themselves.

I'll see your hogwash and raise you a poppycock!

In most states inserting yourself in the middle of a situation where an officer is actively involved in police business, and you create by your actions or involvement a situation where the officer can no longer continue the work that he was doing, you could be charged with obstruction of legal process; and while it might not be an airtight case, I wouldn't risk my freedom (or bank account) on the opinion of an ADA and judge or jury just to make a point.

Understand that I would have a completely different view if the person was just walking down the street, breaking no laws and minding his own business while exercising his legal right to open carry, but that's not what this guy is doing.

HotGuns · October 18th, 2009, 10:54 PM

Be civil people.

There are basically two prevailing opinions here. One says the Cop was the jerk, the other says the OC was a jerk.

Fact of the matter is, we only saw what was presented, and like always, with any video, even with the occasional cop cam videos that we see there is always more to the story.

After watching the video a few times,here's my take on it...

The cop saw the gun and inquired about it. It is clear that he saw a potential threat because he grabbed his gun or motioned to it several times. A cop will interview a person until he makes a determination of how to handle that person. When the cop figured out that the guy knew that he was within legal bounds,and not a threat, he walked away. He appeared to be the Patrol Supervisor because he was driving an unmarked car.

By now, its obvious that the guy is looking for a confrontation so that he can show his friends his video. He followed the cop while asking if he was being detained. It is my opinion that had he been detained, there would be no doubt in his mind, he wouldn't have to keep asking about it and a smarter man would have dropped it right there. When the Cop walks over to one of the protesters to discuss the business at hand, the guy filming get into his business by interrupting him. Any time you interrupt a cop doing his job he probably wont be happy about it because you are making his job more difficult.

It looks like he is explaining public trespass to one of the protesters as he points out what is public property and what it private property, he is basically telling him where he can legally stand and where it becomes trespassing. I have done this myself on a few occasions and I like to make sure that everyone is clear with that so that I don't have to come back and arrest someone. Generally, in my experience,peaceful protesters appreciate knowing where to go and not to go.

After assessing the situation, the Officer left.

Now a few of my own observations,

One, it was the officers responsibility to make sure that everyone was operating within the law.

Two, seeing someone open carry, IS still cause for concern in most places. Maybe someday it wont be, be we are far from that day still.

Three, the officer probably didn't know if the guy was a protester,the property owner, or some Doctor from the clinic that felt threatened. It was his job to find out. When he did figure it out, he left the guy alone after he refused to answer. The fact that the guy did it without be confrontational was to his benefit, thus the police wasted no more time on him, even though he seemed to want them to.

As one that has had to give opinions on police videos about an officers conduct or a "detainees" conduct in an official capacity, I think the officer acted within his duties and did so in an efficient manner.

The man taking the video with his phone, like many people that don't have a clue when dealing with police, went from an inquiring citizen to a pain in the butt when he refused to answer questions and when he interrupted the cop.

Of course, we dont know the "background" of the situation, only what he chose to let us see.

TX-JB · October 19th, 2009, 01:21 AM

Hot Guns,
I think your evaluation of the situation is spot on. I couldn't have said it any better myself.

Thanis · October 19th, 2009, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dougwg

...To the poster that stated that he should have "Give the cop your driver's license and shut up".

I'm sure some of the Jews were saying that in the early days too...

Right. If you don't provide an ID to LEO the next step is Nazis and crematoriums.

I don't care to get involved in this thread, I don't care about the argument if he should have showed an ID or not. Just tired with so many US citizens from the left or the right stating some view is like something.

It is as much of a fantasy to believe asking for an ID leads to Nazis as it is to believe NASA leads to Romulans.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dougwg

...Those that fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it.

So tired of this statement. It is not as insightful as it sounds. Just as insightful as, "Those who cannot, teach."

BuckeyeEric · October 19th, 2009, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by punk rocka

I'll see your hogwash and raise you a poppycock!

In most states inserting yourself in the middle of a situation where an officer is actively involved in police business, and you create by your actions or involvement a situation where the officer can no longer continue the work that he was doing, you could be charged with obstruction of legal process; and while it might not be an airtight case, I wouldn't risk my freedom (or bank account) on the opinion of an ADA and judge or jury just to make a point.

Understand that I would have a completely different view if the person was just walking down the street, breaking no laws and minding his own business while exercising his legal right to open carry, but that's not what this guy is doing.

Nope! Disagree! The guy didn't "insert" himself into anything other then come over and film....like a tourist...He never opened his mouth until the cop started questioning him about his OC. The cop is the one who drew "first blood".

Just because you are OC'ing, should we not do what we would normally do just because we choose to exercises our rights?

sirdarksoul · October 19th, 2009, 01:51 AM

In GA carrying at a protest would probably fall within the public gathering law.

"Public Gatherings: It is against the law (misdemeanor offense) for a person (licensed or not) to carry to or while at a public gathering any explosive compound, firearm, or knife designed for the purpose of offense or defense (including ANY deadly weapon not listed here). A public gathering is defined and includes, but is not limited too, athletic or sporting events, churches or church functions, political rallies and/or functions..."

BuckeyeEric · October 19th, 2009, 01:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirdarksoul

In GA carrying at a protest would probably fall within the public gathering law.

"Public Gatherings: It is against the law (misdemeanor offense) for a person (licensed or not) to carry to or while at a public gathering any explosive compound, firearm, or knife designed for the purpose of offense or defense (including ANY deadly weapon not listed here). A public gathering is defined and includes, but is not limited too, athletic or sporting events, churches or church functions, political rallies and/or functions..."

I think that legislation was introduced after the Olympics there in Atlanta right?

cdwolf · October 19th, 2009, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samwolf

I was with the guy up until the LEO started to walk away and he kept following him saying "Am I being detained? Am I being detained right now".

IMHO, once the LEO walked away and he kept up the "Am I being detained" bit, he became a moron.

+1 that was stupid

, but the cop was in the wrong.

DWeezy · October 19th, 2009, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nova

"Am I being detained?"

Needs to stop saying that. Give the cop your driver's license and shut up.

Baaaaah!

rmodel65 · October 19th, 2009, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bark'n

When push comes to shove, I believe most States have a law requiring a person to carry ID and to produce it when questioned by LEO's.

If a LEO can not identify a person he is questioning as a matter of a field investigation, I believe they can legally detain you until you have been identified.

Of course I am open to being corrected on this matter. But that is my understanding of the law in my State.

GA has no stop and id law, nor does it have any law that says you must provide our firearms license upon request(even though its required to OC or CC)

October 18th, 2009, 10:54 PM	#72
HotGuns Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Arkansas Posts: 7,599	Be civil people. There are basically two prevailing opinions here. One says the Cop was the jerk, the other says the OC was a jerk. Fact of the matter is, we only saw what was presented, and like always, with any video, even with the occasional cop cam videos that we see there is always more to the story. After watching the video a few times,here's my take on it... The cop saw the gun and inquired about it. It is clear that he saw a potential threat because he grabbed his gun or motioned to it several times. A cop will interview a person until he makes a determination of how to handle that person. When the cop figured out that the guy knew that he was within legal bounds,and not a threat, he walked away. He appeared to be the Patrol Supervisor because he was driving an unmarked car. By now, its obvious that the guy is looking for a confrontation so that he can show his friends his video. He followed the cop while asking if he was being detained. It is my opinion that had he been detained, there would be no doubt in his mind, he wouldn't have to keep asking about it and a smarter man would have dropped it right there. When the Cop walks over to one of the protesters to discuss the business at hand, the guy filming get into his business by interrupting him. Any time you interrupt a cop doing his job he probably wont be happy about it because you are making his job more difficult. It looks like he is explaining public trespass to one of the protesters as he points out what is public property and what it private property, he is basically telling him where he can legally stand and where it becomes trespassing. I have done this myself on a few occasions and I like to make sure that everyone is clear with that so that I don't have to come back and arrest someone. Generally, in my experience,peaceful protesters appreciate knowing where to go and not to go. After assessing the situation, the Officer left. Now a few of my own observations, One, it was the officers responsibility to make sure that everyone was operating within the law. Two, seeing someone open carry, IS still cause for concern in most places. Maybe someday it wont be, be we are far from that day still. Three, the officer probably didn't know if the guy was a protester,the property owner, or some Doctor from the clinic that felt threatened. It was his job to find out. When he did figure it out, he left the guy alone after he refused to answer. The fact that the guy did it without be confrontational was to his benefit, thus the police wasted no more time on him, even though he seemed to want them to. As one that has had to give opinions on police videos about an officers conduct or a "detainees" conduct in an official capacity, I think the officer acted within his duties and did so in an efficient manner. The man taking the video with his phone, like many people that don't have a clue when dealing with police, went from an inquiring citizen to a pain in the butt when he refused to answer questions and when he interrupted the cop. Of course, we dont know the "background" of the situation, only what he chose to let us see. __________________ AR. CHL Instr. To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson

October 19th, 2009, 01:21 AM	#73
TX-JB VIP Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sugar Land, TX Posts: 3,163	Hot Guns, I think your evaluation of the situation is spot on. I couldn't have said it any better myself. __________________ *"We're in Texas....Things are different here."* *NRA Life Member*

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

October 19th, 2009, 01:51 AM	#76
sirdarksoul Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: NW Georgia Posts: 86	In GA carrying at a protest would probably fall within the public gathering law. "Public Gatherings: It is against the law (misdemeanor offense) for a person (licensed or not) to carry to or while at a public gathering any explosive compound, firearm, or knife designed for the purpose of offense or defense (including ANY deadly weapon not listed here). A public gathering is defined and includes, but is not limited too, athletic or sporting events, churches or church functions, political rallies and/or functions..."