|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453 |
Maybe you missed that "forcibly disarmed" part in the story above?
That means any cop has the right to forcibly disarm any citizen before they even ask if you have a license. You good with that? Maybe you are unfamiliar with Terry stops. You want the cop to leave any person stopped completely armed if they simply say "no"? You think that illegally armed felon was going to say "sure", and that he posed no threat?
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 42,625 Likes: 1
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 42,625 Likes: 1 |
Steve: Let's just say TRH has some resentment (justified or not, I will let him address) issues with the LEO community and leave it at that.
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453 |
Terry stop; been Constitutionally valid for a long damned time.
Are some folks so daft as to think that the cop should stop someone and NOT check for weapons in the course of the stop? Holy f'k... There was no probable cause to stop him. From what I'm reading, a convenience store clerk's gun printed and the cop forcibly disarmed him AND THEN checked to see if he was legal. The PC is that carrying concealed without a permit is illegal in that state. That is probable cause of a possible crime in progress.
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453 |
Steve: Let's just say TRH has some resentment (justified or not, I will let him address) issues with the LEO community and leave it at that. Well, they are in his neighborhood quite often busting his neighbors...
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 15,601 Likes: 1
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 15,601 Likes: 1 |
The officer did get it right, but that's not the basis upon which to make a legal decision. You have to think about the precedent set for other officers and lawfully armed citizens. Officers have to get it right while acting within the law. It makes their job more difficult, but it's not supposed to be easy for police in America where we have a Bill of Rights. Mexican cops have it real easy, but you wouldn't want to be stopped by a cop in Mexico. Bullshit, plain and simple. A LEO needs the tools to protect himself while doing his job. Any cop wants to put me on a wall, frisk me, and disarm me is welcome to do so, as long as he acts professionally. Dicking around and asking to see permits would see officers get shot. I have no issue if an officer feels he needs me disarmed in any interaction. Fact is, the cops don't always deal with the law abiding. Fair play simply doesn't work in hostile and life threatening situations. And there is a marked difference between suspicion and probable cause. A policeman may stop and frisk due to suspicion. And suspicion, in uncountable court cases, is a very low bar. The cop did right, and so did the courts...
"Chances Will Be Taken"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453 |
Maybe you missed that "forcibly disarmed" part in the story above?
That means any cop has the right to forcibly disarm any citizen before they even ask if you have a license. You good with that? Yup, you are correct, it is a "Story". Here is the actual decision. read it then come back with something more that what was published as a "story". http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FCO%2020131231054/U.S.%20v.%20RODRIGUEZ Oops. Damned facts, anyway.
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,793 Likes: 23
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,793 Likes: 23 |
Reading the actual court record on the matter eases my concerns a great deal. The summation of the events from the article didn't seem to get it quite right.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,659
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,659 |
There was a big thread a week or two back about a court decision in which they upheld a cop's right to disarm and frisk any concealed carry people upon a stop. Looks like Gorsuch agreed with a similar opinion. He didn't write the opinion, but he signed on to it. One case is hardly cause for panic, but it's good to be aware of it and I hope that one of the brilliant pro-2A Senators grills him on it during his confirmation hearing. http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/judge_neil_gorsuch_some_cause_for_concern.htmlOn the other hand, there is reason for pause with Judge Gorsuch's record. Judge Gorsuch joined in one opinion, United States v. Rodriguez, 739 F.3d 481 (11th Cir. 2013), which causes us to have some concern about his understanding of the relationship between the government and an armed citizenry. To be fair, Judge Gorsuch did not write the Rodriguez opinion – his colleague, Judge Bobby Baldock, was the author. Nevertheless, Judge Gorsuch joined the opinion. He could have filed a principled dissenting opinion, or even a concurring opinion agreeing only in the judgment.
The facts of the case are these. A New Mexico policeman observed Mr. Rodriguez, a convenience store clerk, carrying a concealed handgun. Carrying a concealed loaded handgun is illegal in New Mexico without a permit but legal if one has a license to do so. The officer, upon seeing a Rodriguez's handgun, detained him, then – acting first and asking questions later – forcibly disarmed Rodriguez. After finding out that Rodriguez did not, in fact, have a license to carry and, indeed, was a convicted felon, the officer placed him under arrest.
Of course, hard cases make bad law. But the precedent from the Rodriguez opinion will affect police-citizen relations in New Mexico, and possibly elsewhere in the Tenth Circuit, for many years to come. Not bothering to figure out the legality of Rodriguez's firearm before detaining and disarming him, the officer's initial actions would have been the same even if Mr. Rodriguez had been a lawful gun owner.
According to the 10th Circuit's opinion, the police are justified in forcibly disarming every armed citizen based on nothing more than the presence of a concealed firearm. This allows the police to treat every law-abiding gun owner like a criminal – which, in many cases we have seen, includes rough treatment such as grabbing him, twisting his arm behind his back, slamming him down on the ground, and handcuffing him. Far too many police officers do not like anyone to be armed other than themselves and have taken it upon themselves to intimidate those who dare to exercise Second Amendment rights. Under the Rodriguez decision, only after being forcibly disarmed and detained would a citizen be entitled to demonstrate that he was lawfully exercising his Second Amendment rights. TRH - I agree with you
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much" Teddy Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453 |
Reading the actual court record on the matter eases my concerns a great deal. The summation of the events from the article didn't seem to get it quite right. Well, that makes all the difference. TRH is relieved; y'all just stop the presses and know all is good with the world because the paranoid has his concerns eased.
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 18,243
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 18,243 |
I'm not sure its a big deal. Like we keep saying here, when in contact with LEO just comply with them..if they feel better with you disarmed so be it, it will only be temporary. I don't carry concealed but that's the way I'd play it. Generally with cops...you get what you give.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,499
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,499 |
I got stopped for speeding right after we moved here. Was carrying concealed, no permit, as is legal. Told the officer I was carrying. He had me exit the truck, removed my pistol from its holster(as is legal for him to do), had me sit in the truck while he ran my license.
He came back, handed me my license, unloaded pistol, the mag, and asked me to slow down in the future and to have a nice evening.
There is no way to coexist no matter how many bumper stickers there are on Subaru bumpers!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,233
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,233 |
I do not know all of the facts surrounding the decision that Calhoun linked above but after reading the appeal decision am curious if many folks are getting caught up in the word "forcible". Perhaps many people take the word forcible to mean "using an act of violence", which it indeed can mean.
Strange enough the definition of forcible in the Cambridge Dictionary reads as this:
forcible: adjective. Involving physical power
forcible: adjective. Without choice
If one considers these definitions in regards to the incident linked above then it is certainly reasonable to also derive that as the the officer stated, he was there for 2 men reported to be armed, he saw the gun while contacting the individual, physically removed the weapon without force or violence simply for officer and individual safety and then id'd the individual where upon the felon status was revealed.
Not saying that's how things went, just that there is no evidence the individual was roughed up in any way and quite possibly folks are hung up on personal interpretation of the word "forcible".
I am no scholar of law, but believe in most states that issue ccw permits that carrying a concealed weapon is in fact illegal by state statute and that the ccw then becomes a permittable defense to violation of said law. Obviously this is null in void in states without ccw permits.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,951
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,951 |
To date..I've never had anything but cooperation and compliance with anyone with a concealed carry permit. Just be smart about what you're doing. If an officer asks if you're armed, tell them the truth. I dont want to see your gun and I'll probably ask that you leave it where it is until I'm gone. If I need to disarm you, the fact that you have a permit means nothing. Just a couple recommendations... know exactly what you can and can't do with it and don't be drunk and carrying. Thank you once again for your support.
Deadlines and commitments, what to leave in, what to leave out...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 16,000
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 16,000 |
I got stopped for speeding right after we moved here. Was carrying concealed, no permit, as is legal. Told the officer I was carrying. He had me exit the truck, removed my pistol from its holster(as is legal for him to do), had me sit in the truck while he ran my license.
He came back, handed me my license, unloaded pistol, the mag, and asked me to slow down in the future and to have a nice evening. thats kind of the way it works now, sort of, more so in outlying areas. on the other hand prior to arizona establishing the right to carry without permit needed this happened. guy who had a ccw had a gun wedged between the front seats, driving through goofus land, i think chandler, gets pulled over. Was him and his wife. cop arrests wife who does not have ccw for weapons violation as gun was in ready access to her too. I solved the problem at the time as my wife has her own ccw now. Not needed in arizona now, but still good to have when buying firearms.
THE BIRTH PLACE OF GERONIMO
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 42,843 Likes: 6
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 42,843 Likes: 6 |
I'm not sure its a big deal. Like we keep saying here, when in contact with LEO just comply with them..if they feel better with you disarmed so be it, it will only be temporary. I've always experienced ZERO problems with LEOs, when I let them know if I do or don't have firearms in my vehicle, right off the bat... and do a lot of yes sir, no sir to their questions... cooperate and don't show anything but respect... never had a cop want to confiscate my firearms... or give me any harassment...
"Minus the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the Country" Marion Barry, Mayor of Wash DC
“Owning guns is not a right. If it were a right, it would be in the Constitution.” ~Alexandria Ocasio Cortez
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 43,777 Likes: 1
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 43,777 Likes: 1 |
Thanks for the link, steve4102. So in summary, it really comes down to something somewhat similar to the thread a week or two ago.
But not totally.. in that case the police pulled the car over and talked to the occupants. It wasn't until the passenger become uncooperative that a frisk was made and the gun taken.
In this case no attempt was made to ascertain whether the clerk had a permit or not before the officer disarmed him. The clerk was working, so far less likely to be engaged in criminal activity than someone driving around in a car.
That difference could become very important if nationwide reciprocity is passed. It's going to fine that Illinois/New York/New Jersey has to recognize your concealed carry permits, but the cops are allowed to forcibly disarm you before even asking if you have a permit? I personally don't want to meet up with their finest and their methods of disarming suspects..
“ The Savage 99 Pocket Reference”. All models and variations of 1895’s, 1899’s and 99’s covered. Also dates, checkering, engraving.. Find at www.savagelevers.com
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,082
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,082 |
I recently got pulled over by the town of Jackson for not using a hands free phone device inside the city limits. First thing the officer asked was if I was carrying. I answered yes. He asked where. I told him right front pocket. He asked that I leave it there. I already had drivers license, insurance, and registration out for him when he came to the window. Kept my hands out where he could see them and was polite. Took my warning and went on about my business. Dealing with cops in these situations isn't rocket science. Even though I think the hands free law is ridiculous it doesn't do me any good to give the officer a ration of chit about it. That's what city councils are for.
Stupidity is expensive
If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 43,777 Likes: 1
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 43,777 Likes: 1 |
I recently got pulled over by the town of Jackson for not using a hands free phone device inside the city limits. First thing the officer asked was if I was carrying. I answered yes. He asked where. I told him right front pocket. He asked that I leave it there. I already had drivers license, insurance, and registration out for him when he came to the window. Kept my hands out where he could see them and was polite. Took my warning and went on about my business. Dealing with cops in these situations isn't rocket science. Even though I think the hands free law is ridiculous it doesn't do me any good to give the officer a ration of chit about it. That's what city councils are for. That's how interactions should go, I totally agree.
“ The Savage 99 Pocket Reference”. All models and variations of 1895’s, 1899’s and 99’s covered. Also dates, checkering, engraving.. Find at www.savagelevers.com
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,168
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,168 |
That difference could become very important if nationwide reciprocity is passed. It's going to fine that Illinois/New York/New Jersey has to recognize your concealed carry permits, but the cops are allowed to forcibly disarm you before even asking if you have a permit? I personally don't want to meet up with their finest and their methods of disarming suspects..
Especially if it means Tasing you preemptively (you know for officer safety)
The collection of taxes which are not absolutely required, which do not beyond reasonable doubt contribute to public welfare, is only a species of legalized larceny. Under this Republic the rewards of industry belong to those who earn them. Coolidge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453 |
Thanks for the link, steve4102. So in summary, it really comes down to something somewhat similar to the thread a week or two ago.
But not totally.. in that case the police pulled the car over and talked to the occupants. It wasn't until the passenger become uncooperative that a frisk was made and the gun taken.
In this case no attempt was made to ascertain whether the clerk had a permit or not before the officer disarmed him. The clerk was working, so far less likely to be engaged in criminal activity than someone driving around in a car.
That difference could become very important if nationwide reciprocity is passed. It's going to fine that Illinois/New York/New Jersey has to recognize your concealed carry permits, but the cops are allowed to forcibly disarm you before even asking if you have a permit? I personally don't want to meet up with their finest and their methods of disarming suspects.. The issue is that carrying concealed without a permit is illegal in that state. The cop saw a concealed weapon; PC of a crime in progress, which permitted the stop.
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
|
|
|
|
|
528 members (219DW, 1234, 007FJ, 12344mag, 1minute, 222Sako, 54 invisible),
2,392
guests, and
1,311
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,795
Posts18,496,223
Members73,977
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
