Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection > Court upholds police pointing gun at lawful carrier

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-03-2010, 08:27 PM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
lukeisme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 198
Liked 11 Times on 8 Posts

Default

I guess yes the officer has a right to defend himself, and yes the attorney had the right to carry the weapon, but the attorney also had the right to defend himself. I guess no matter who is pointing a weapon in my face I consider that a threat to my life. Hum makes ya wonder if the attoney would have taken steps to defend himself against an out of control officer what would the outcome have been. Constitutional rights were clearly violated here. What would have happened if the attoney would have pointed his weapon at say someone who was going to mug him. Would he have been burned there for defending himself? An officer of the law is just that, they are not there to be dirty harry or take a personal stand based on personal beliefs. Geeze I thought they had all kinds of testing to weed out these less then stable people?? What is the point of law enforcement when it turns out to actually be personal will enforcement that is held just barely in an obvious grey area. Now I have no problem with the fine men and women that put theirs lifes on the line for you and me everyday!! I am very grateful to these wonderful souls. What disturbs me is that more and more all the time we are seeing where they are crossing the line and getting away with it. Rules and regulations for the common man are getting more and more unreasonable every day. Government like any other life or entity will always try and grow and try to control everything. It is the job of those of us the common man and those in law enforcement to help keep this pruned and functioning the way it was ment to. A healthy productive tree is a pruned tree.

__________________
lukeisme is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2010, 08:34 PM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 159
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeisme View Post
A healthy productive tree is a pruned tree.
That's a really good point.

It doesn't surprise me that there was a rogue officer running about, naturally that will happen as some of us just go nuts from time to time. What is upsetting me here is that the judges sided with the rogue officer. If you read the transcript, it seems so obvious that the officer was in the wrong. It's as if the judges were afraid to or just didn't want to usurp the officer's authority for some reason. What on earth is happening here? Why can't judges be held more accountable for their actions?
__________________
themyst is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2010, 12:41 AM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
gorknoids's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Virginia Beach,Virginia
Posts: 2,424
Liked 7 Times on 5 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default

I can understand asking for the license, since the firearm clearly wasn't "concealed". I can even understand verifying it. What I do NOT accept is doing the second-most dangerous thing you can do with a firearm; Aiming it at a person.
The cop is a f*cking idiot and should be let go for....idiocy.

__________________

"Guns don't kill people. Male Kennedy's kill people."

gorknoids is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2010, 01:35 AM   #14
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
robocop10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Austin,Texas, by God!!
Posts: 9,941
Liked 2604 Times on 1370 Posts
Likes Given: 202

Default

OK, here in Texas, you are required to keep a concealed handgun "concealed". If the officer saw it, it was not kept concealed. Did the officer have a right to disarm the attorney at gun point? Yes. Was that the best way to handle the situation? Probably not. Have you ever tried to confirm the validity of a Massachusetts CHL? When in a different, non-contiguous state? Confirming a Texas CHL is easy, when in Texas.

Was this legal? I guess so. Was it smart? NO!

__________________

In life, strive to take the high road....It offers a better field of fire.
"Robo is right" Fuzzball


Last edited by robocop10mm; 01-04-2010 at 12:16 PM.
robocop10mm is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2010, 08:09 AM   #15
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Kage0113's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 92
Default

Well said robocop. I usually agree with the police in most situations, seeing as how I am aspiring to be an officer. But this situation was handled terribly. The attorney should have properly concealed his firearm, but also was not posing a threat. The officer shouldn't have flipped out the way he did, he could have caused more harm then good if the guy actually wanted to shoot him. Poorly handled situation.

__________________

Smith&Wesson M&P .45
Beretta 92fs

NRA member since November 16, 2009

"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."-V

Kage0113 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2010, 02:29 PM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robocop10mm View Post
Did the officer have a right to disarm the attorney at gun point? Yes.
Got to disagree with you. Pointing a firearm at someone is using deadly force. If the attorney did not threaten the officer then the officer had no right to aim in on him.

Now it is going to depend on what part of NE it happened. But all of the area allows open carry. Some parts are licenced others are not. So it does not matter if he was printing, or if his pistol was seen for a brief second.

It is sh1t like this that makes me want to continue migrating farther south.
__________________

When the white man discovered this country Indians were running it. No taxes, no debt, women did all the work. White man thought he could improve on a system like this.

Louisville is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2010, 03:18 PM   #17
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Dzscubie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: El Paso,Texas
Posts: 2,521
Liked 39 Times on 19 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louisville View Post
Got to disagree with you. Pointing a firearm at someone is using deadly force. If the attorney did not threaten the officer then the officer had no right to aim in on him.

Now it is going to depend on what part of NE it happened. But all of the area allows open carry. Some parts are licenced others are not. So it does not matter if he was printing, or if his pistol was seen for a brief second.

It is sh1t like this that makes me want to continue migrating farther south.
Louisville,

I will have to disagree with you on this statement. You observance that pointing a weapon at someone is using deadly force is an old military mind set. Using a weapon is deadly force. I will not wait until someone shoots at me to be proactive. I will not shoot someone for just seeing a weapon, BUT, I will go home to my family every night and won't give a possible BG the edge by having my firearm in the holster. As for aiming at him, bad guys don't carry signs or have criminal tattooed on their forehead so covering a possible armed criminal ... yeah, I would have covered him with my weapon also, and I would have re-holstered when the subjects weapon was secured.

Now carrying concealed is different from open carry. Criminals carrying concealed even in open carry areas. Criminals carry concealed because they don't want possible victims to be aware of the gun until they strike.

Cops don’t have a way to interdict a criminal except stopping questioning and interviewing people when they see something out of the ordinary, could this have been handled better... yes, could it have been handled worse... yes.
__________________
"I never killed anyone who didn't need killing."
JW Hardin
Dzscubie is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 12:15 AM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hillbilly68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,000
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

An ego and a badge are a bad mix. Somehow we have lost our way, haven't we?

__________________

________________________________________
"I'm your brother, just make it count."

hillbilly68 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 05:12 AM   #19
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzscubie View Post
Louisville,

I will have to disagree with you on this statement. You observance that pointing a weapon at someone is using deadly force is an old military mind set. Using a weapon is deadly force.
You might want to check your local laws then. Because in many states, NC included, simply pointing a firearm at a person is considered using lethal (civilian verbage for deadly) force.

Quote:
I will not wait until someone shoots at me to be proactive. I will not shoot someone for just seeing a weapon, BUT, I will go home to my family every night and won't give a possible BG the edge by having my firearm in the holster.
I would not wait till someone shoots at me to be proactive either. But I will not react until there is a clear and imminent danger to myself. Seeing someone that has a gun does not place me in imminent danger.

Quote:
As for aiming at him, bad guys don't carry signs or have criminal tattooed on their forehead so covering a possible armed criminal ...
No they do not but you are innocent until proven guilty. In this Cop's eyes he was guilty the second he saw the gun and you can see that by his actions. If he made no threat then there was no reason to initate the use of deadly force.

Quote:
yeah, I would have covered him with my weapon also, and I would have re-holstered when the subjects weapon was secured.
I am very sorry to hear that. Cause if you behaved that way where I came up your family would be missing you very much. Where I come from folk dont care to have their lives threatned when they are obeying the law.


Quote:
Cops don’t have a way to interdict a criminal except stopping questioning and interviewing people when they see something out of the ordinary, could this have been handled better... yes, could it have been handled worse... yes.
Thats fine stop and question him. That is what a cop is supposed to do. But to initate the use of deadly force because he saw a gun is not only wrong, but should be illegal. Cops are supposed to be held to a higher standard than this. So are judges.
__________________

When the white man discovered this country Indians were running it. No taxes, no debt, women did all the work. White man thought he could improve on a system like this.

Louisville is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 05:58 AM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Dzscubie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: El Paso,Texas
Posts: 2,521
Liked 39 Times on 19 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louisville View Post
You might want to check your local laws then. Because in many states, NC included, simply pointing a firearm at a person is considered using lethal (civilian verbage for deadly) force.



I would not wait till someone shoots at me to be proactive either. But I will not react until there is a clear and imminent danger to myself. Seeing someone that has a gun does not place me in imminent danger.

Look Louisville, you forget the original post the lawyer was in a known high crime area and the cop was on duty. You take the totality of the circumstances to determin how you approach. I don't know exactly how this went down and we only have the lawyers account to judge.


No they do not but you are innocent until proven guilty. In this Cop's eyes he was guilty the second he saw the gun and you can see that by his actions. If he made no threat then there was no reason to initate the use of deadly force.

I admit it could have been handled better, but you are judging the cop without his side of it. Don't judge completely until you have all the facts, we don't on this post. All I'm saying is I can see how it could have happened that the cop covered him in this situation.

I am very sorry to hear that. Cause if you behaved that way where I came up your family would be missing you very much. Where I come from folk dont care to have their lives threatned when they are obeying the law.

I see so you will pop a cop on duty in uniform because you think you can do what ever you want? It's stupid black and white statements that cause incidents go esculate and people get hurt. I have delt with a lot of people with your mindset, sad very sad.


Thats fine stop and question him. That is what a cop is supposed to do. But to initate the use of deadly force because he saw a gun is not only wrong, but should be illegal. Cops are supposed to be held to a higher standard than this. So are judges.
Another stupid statement to me, but what the hell I've only been on the streets for 34 years what the hell do I know compared to your justification. We are held to a higher standard and civilians like you and your assinine beliefs have contributed to many a funeral I have attended. Walk a mile in my shoes here and then come back and we can talk.
__________________
"I never killed anyone who didn't need killing."
JW Hardin
Dzscubie is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
pointing unloaded guns MrTouchdown Training & Safety 69 07-31-2011 03:27 AM
New bolt carrier group = check headspace? infotech General Rifle Discussion 2 12-26-2008 04:27 PM
firing pin carrier Chong General Rifle Discussion 0 11-02-2007 03:44 PM
Buttstock Shell Carrier McBeaver General Shotgun Discussion 1 07-23-2007 03:30 AM
A pro gun long distance carrier opaww Politics, Religion and Controversy 3 07-06-2007 02:56 PM