Firearm & Gun Forum -

Firearm & Gun Forum - (
-   Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection (
-   -   Court upholds police pointing gun at lawful carrier (

jeffxc 01-02-2010 06:56 PM

Court upholds police pointing gun at lawful carrier
I read this article this afternoon:

Is this the reaction concealed carry should bring from the police? Oleg Volk, A Human Right

It's open season on gun carriers.

A case out of the First Circuit has some painful lessons for gun carriers in Georgia. A United States Circuit Court of Appeals last week upheld the constitutionality of pointing a gun at any citizen daring to carry, lawfully, a concealed weapon in public.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals is the Court just below the United States Supreme Court in the New England states. The case stems from a lawyer who sued a police officer after he was detained for lawfully carrying a concealed weapon while in possession of a license to carry concealed. According to the case opinion, the lawyer, Greg Schubert, had a pistol concealed under his suit coat, and Mr. Schubert was walking in what the court described as a "high crime area." At some point a police officer, J.B. Stern, who lived up to his last name, caught a glimpse of the attorney's pistol, and he leapt out of his patrol car "in a dynamic and explosive manner" with his gun drawn, pointing it at the attorney's face.

Officer Stern "executed a pat-frisk," and Mr. Schubert produced his license to carry a concealed weapon. He was disarmed and ordered to stand in front of the patrol car in the hot sun. At some point, the officer locked him in the back seat of the police car and delivered a lecture. Officer Stern "partially Mirandized Schubert, mentioned the possibility of a criminal charge, and told Schubert that he (Stern) was the only person allowed to carry a weapon on his beat."

For most people, this would be enough to conclude that they were being harassed for the exercise of a constitutional right, but the officer went further, seizing the attorney's pistol and leaving with it. Officer Stern reasoned that because he could not confirm the "facially valid" license to carry, he would not permit the attorney to carry. Officer Stern drove away with the license and the firearm, leaving the attorney unarmed, dressed in a suit, and alone in what the officer himself argued was a high crime area.

The attorney sued in federal court, but the District Court threw out his suit, ruling that Officer Stern's behavior is the proper way to treat people who lawfully carry concealed pistols. Mr. Schubert appealed, and the First Circuit upheld the District Court's ruling. The court held that the stop was lawful and that Officer Stern "was permitted to take actions to ensure his own safety."

The court further held that the officer was entitled to confirm the validity of a "facially valid" license to carry a concealed weapon. The problem for Officer Stern was that there is no way to do so in Massachusetts, where this incident occurred. As a result, the court held that Officer Stern "sensibly opted to terminate the stop and release Schubert, but retain the weapon."

Georgia is not in the First Circuit, but this case holds some harsh lessons for Georgians who exercise their right to bear arms. Recall that in the MARTA case here in Georgia, the court held that the officer was entitled to take measures to protect himself, including disarming the person carrying, and entitled to investigate further for a half hour even after Mr. Raissi produced a Georgia firearms license. Although the officers in that case did not actually point a gun at Mr. Raissi's face, as Officer Stern did to attorney Schubert, it is a logical conclusion that the court would have upheld the constitutionality of them doing so. The vast majority of the cases MARTA cited in its briefs to the federal court included an officer pointing a gun at the person stopped. In addition, carrying a concealed weapon onto the MARTA system is a felony, and no court is going to hold that an officer violated any constitutional right by pointing a gun at an armed felon.

Furthermore, it must be recalled that Georgia, like Massachussetts and the vast majority of states, has no system to confirm the validity of a Georgia firearms license. The similarities between the MARTA federal opinion and the First Circuit opinion are startling, and the implications for Georgia are clear.

This First Circuit case is a logical extension of the MARTA case here in Georgia, and it shows what armed Georgians can expect if the General Assembly does not take action soon to correct the presumption of criminality that federal judge Thomas Thrash attached to the exercise of the right to bear arms.

Welcome to the new "right" to bear arms.
For more info: Read the full text of the First Circuit opinion by clicking here.

spittinfire 01-02-2010 07:09 PM

I honestly can't believe that was upheld but then again I can.

themyst 01-02-2010 07:25 PM

According to Police state Definition | Definition of Police state at

"police state -
n. A state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic, and political life of the people, especially by means of a secret police force."

I don't understand why the public in general isn't outraged by hearing something like this. When it starts happening over a lawfully concealed weapon, it will happen with other things, too. :mad:

ETA: I went back to the link and carefully read the entire document. UNBELIEVABLE. It is clear to me that these judges are not thinking reasonably. Using the lame logic of the judges, it would be perfectly reasonable to hassle the ordinary citizen at random just in case he is doing something illegal. But you know, while typing that last sentence, it seemed outrageous - but the more I think about it, it is already happening like that. Don't DUI checks operate that way? I've never hit one before, but I think they just pull you over for no reason, right? This just all makes me sick. It really does.

Glasshartt 01-02-2010 07:38 PM

:eek: :confused: :mad:

dunerunner 01-02-2010 11:16 PM

Looks like there is some heavy work to do with respect to 2A!!

General_lee 01-03-2010 01:25 AM

I would be banned if I said the words I want to say about this outrage.

c3shooter 01-03-2010 04:11 AM

Well, today the Grandurchin was bumming around with grandad. We were visiting a few places for the fun of it, quiet but cold Sunday afternoon here in Virginia. One of the places we visited was the tour of the Virginia State Capitol. When we entered, on the right was a Capitol Police Officer standing by the metal detector/ package Xray unit. The Grandurchin put her cell phone and pocket knife in the dish for x ray, walked through the detector. I handed the officer my concealed carry license. He checked it over, handed it back, said thank you sir, please walk through, and have a good day. The detector beeped loudly as I walked through due to the Model 36 in the IWB. But here in Virginia, citizens are not forbidden to carry in the Capitol. Kinda like it here. :)

Glasshartt 01-03-2010 07:09 PM


Originally Posted by jeffxc (Post 207474)
I read this article this afternoon:

Furthermore, it must be recalled that Georgia, like Massachussetts and the vast majority of states, has no system to confirm the validity of a Georgia firearms license.

I don't understand why they hav no system to confirm the valdiity if the permit. In Texas, the info is available when a LEO does a driver's license check.

General_lee 01-03-2010 07:48 PM

So, here in Georgia, a person legally licensed to carry is considered a criminal?? WHAT THE FRENCH, TOAST!!?????

Jess 01-03-2010 07:53 PM

that is no good at all.

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:10 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.