Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,416 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I want opinions on something I saw on Discovery Channel recently and has been on my mind(maybe some of you saw it as well). I forget the show, but a group of US marhsalls were in Miami, DC, and New Orleans. In Miami they were searching an apartment complex for drugs and guns that are used by local gang members. I believe they had a few prime suspects they wanted to apprehend too.

So here's what happened. They stop a man who has a .40 Taurus on him. He has a CCW and had the gun concealed. They ask him some questions and ask if they might be able to check his vehicle out as well. He agrees and gives them the keys. In his trunk, behind a large speaker box, they find an AK-47 which is unloaded and there is a single fully loaded magazine in there too. Now, I know the law says "securely encased" for firearms you keep in the car. I'm assuming the law he broke was keeping it outside of any case or box? They arrested him but they did not mention the charges.

Not that it concerns me much but at first glance I said he had a permit so why did they go so far anyway? Obviously the mistake was allowing the search, but he did not have it encased. It was a bad area, high drug traffic, gang activity, lots of gang related violence etc.

Now I'm wondering how many gang members and persons of questionable character get CCW permits to have an easier time of carrying a loaded weapon around, thus harming the image of other CCW holders when they are caught in criminal activities.

The memorable line? "That's the cop killer gun" (referring to the AK-47). I laughed, as far as I know any gun could potentially kill a person. I know the AK gets a bad rep from the various gangs etc. Legally though, I can own one if I choose to and it wouldn't be any more or less deadly to LEOs than my .22lr since I wouldn't use it in that way.

Anyhow, it's something I saw that made me feel weird. I didn't know whether they did a good job, or were giving someone a hard time because he decided to carry. I obviously don't have all the info about the person in question, whether or not he had any affiliation with gangs etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
357 Posts
Hard to say since 100% of all TV is produced for entertainment and it of course gets biased towards the producers views. Footage gets edited out of order to make it seem more shocking than it is. Almost anything could have happened and the show just left out details. Hypothetically, he could easily have had an outstanding bench warrant for something simple like failure to appear in court, but the producers cut it to make it look like he was arrested for the gun. Now I'm not saying that's what happened but it easily could have.

Mike Rowe wrote a great little post on his awesome show, Dirty Jobs, how even they do things to make the show more exciting. While they don't script it, they will do something they know will probably cause hilarious failure because its good television. I am paraphrasing here but his parting comment was, "If there is one thing you NEVER see on TV, its reality."

To get the facts you would need to track down the events to where it actually happened but that's probably impossible. Do you remember what was on the screen when the Cop Killer Gun line was said? Often they will take long shots of items and then voice over additional material. Hollywood is brutal about ignoring reality.

My 2 cents
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
Here is section 790 from online sunshine.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

Here is FS 790.25

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0790/SEC25.HTM&Title=->2009->Ch0790->Section%2025#0790.25

(5) POSSESSION IN PRIVATE CONVEYANCE.--Notwithstanding subsection (2), it is lawful and is not a violation of s. 790.01 for a person 18 years of age or older to possess a concealed firearm or other weapon for self-defense or other lawful purpose within the interior of a private conveyance, without a license, if the firearm or other weapon is securely encased or is otherwise not readily accessible for immediate use. Nothing herein contained prohibits the carrying of a legal firearm other than a handgun anywhere in a private conveyance when such firearm is being carried for a lawful use. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to authorize the carrying of a concealed firearm or other weapon on the person. This subsection shall be liberally construed in favor of the lawful use, ownership, and possession of firearms and other weapons, including lawful self-defense as provided in s. 776.012.
In the trunk seems to be Legal. They must have arrested him on another charge, the editors just left that part out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
221 Posts
Securily Encased means in any snapped holster; bag that zips, snaps or uses velcro; trunk, glove box or console, or trunk. If it is not readily accessible to the person it is legal. They probably edited it out...or it was a bunch of feds who didn't know all of Florida's laws.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
If I'm not mistaken a Florida CWFL does not allow you to conceal or carry a rifle.

Not really the OP's question but I thought I'd make that point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
452 Posts
I don't remember any limitations on the Florida CWP about rifles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,548 Posts
When the police ask to search, think of Nancy Reagan: "Just say 'No'".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,899 Posts
So many people forget - you can say NO when they "ask" for permission for further search's. They asked him and he gave permission.

I was taught in the Federal Police Academy - if you don't have probably cause and have to "ask" - and they say "no" - then that's it - let em go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
266 Posts
NEVER, EVER consent to a search. 99.9% of the time it's a fishing expedition and they would never ask for a warrant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
261 Posts
With some of the multijursdictional get togethers that has LE from all over, those LE may not be well versed on state law. A CIA buddy of mine explained that to me years ago. He said that one instance was around the Fort Riley/Junction City, Ks area. The Kansas bunch had to line out some of the officers from out of state.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,038 Posts
When the police ask to search, think of Nancy Reagan: "Just say 'No'".
Bingo

Doesn't need to be a gun.

A guy here in Va was arrested because he had a pair of bolt cutters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,152 Posts
I saw the same episode and about dropped bricks when he consented to the search. They were on a power tripping "we're the good guys and everyone else is bad" run. Some of those fools need a good :twak:.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
90 Posts
So many people forget - you can say NO when they "ask" for permission for further search's. They asked him and he gave permission.

I was taught in the Federal Police Academy - if you don't have probably cause and have to "ask" - and they say "no" - then that's it - let em go.
NEVER, EVER consent to a search. 99.9% of the time it's a fishing expedition and they would never ask for a warrant.

UMM... not trying to argue but wouldnt saying no give them cause to think you are hiding something and then do the search with the probable cause effect? thats always been my thinking. :gah:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
I saw the same show and picked up on that scene as well. I believe I even commented on it to my wife at the time. The AK was in the trunk area and wrapped in a sheet or blanket or something. Far from being accessible. I think what made it stand out to me was that he asked why he was being arrested and they couldn't give him a reason yet they were taking him away anyway.

Right after that they cut to a bunch of images of drugs to imply that they were related. Who knows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,780 Posts
NEVER, EVER consent to a search.
This. ^^

Detain me all day...I am not going to consent to a warrant-less search.
Suckers get got by this method every day of the week.

- Janq
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,765 Posts
UMM... not trying to argue but wouldnt saying no give them cause to think you are hiding something and then do the search with the probable cause effect? thats always been my thinking. :gah:
NO. Refusing a request to search, can't be construed as probable cause.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,780 Posts
NO. Refusing a request to search, can't be construed as probable cause.
Yep.

Same as refusing to make a 'statement' or even speak to a police cannot by law be construed to be an admission of guilt or even association to the incident of investigation.
Same applies to making the choice to request legal counsel aka 'lawyer up'.

Sadly though many people have the assumption to the contrary and it does not help that the media and hollywood as well as fiction books play on that ignorance as being a reflection toward who dun it ahhhaaa he/she did it fact.

Best thing a person can do for them self is to keep their mouth shut.
Speak only when spoken to.
Answer only what is questioned as in a terse fashion.
If given/asked for approval to have activities and actions done to your person or property then that is you opportunity to say "NO!" and is not a mandate to state 'yes'.

This is America people, not Spain or England or Mexico or...Haiti.
Know your laws and rights, and exercise them to the fullest.
Not just those that are 2A specific.

- Janq
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
756 Posts
I'm guessing they arrested him for another reason. However, we'll probably never know, since you say that the TV show never mentioned specific charges.

But IF the US Marshals arrested the individual for FS 790.25, I'd be surprised. If that is the charge with which the suspect was arrested, I'd bet that they happened to have a local police officer tagging along, who actually performed the arrest. Unless the State specifically grants federal law enforcement officers the power to enforce state law, they'd have no authority themselves to execute an arrest for that particular offense.

With that said, many state legislatures nowadays have granted federal LEO's the authority to arrest or detain for state offenses, provided that the suspect is promptly turned over to local authorities. I've heard that in alot of border states, U.S. Border Patrol regularly detains drivers on suspicion of DWI, until a sheriff's deputy arrives. I've also heard that some states, such as New York, recognizes federal LEO's with "peace officer status", even though they are not peace officers.
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Top