Court upholds police pointing gun at lawful carrier - Page 3
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 01-05-2010, 07:28 AM   #21
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Endor
Posts: 335
Liked 10 Times on 7 Posts
Likes Given: 16

Default

Dear God, I feel for that man, If i was in that situation i dont know what i would do.

__________________

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix

Biohazurd is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 09:19 AM   #22
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Rogers, AR
Posts: 6,262
Liked 2 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biohazurd View Post
Dear God, I feel for that man, If i was in that situation i dont know what i would do.
I would keep my concealed handgun......concealed!!
__________________
Gojubrian is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 02:25 PM   #23
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 27
Default

Quote:
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.
Yeah, lets see here. Guy wearing a suit walking along and you draw your firearm on him.

Quote:
All I'm saying is I can see how it could have happened that the cop covered him in this situation.
The only way I can see the cop being justified in drawing on him is if the guy threatened the cop. But from the cops own words we can see that didn't happen.

Quote:
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.
I never said I would. I said that if he had done that where I come up he would have likely been shot. Your actions have concequences. If you choose to threaten the wrong person where I came up you have to live with those concequences.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dzscubie View Post
Walk a mile in my shoes here and then come back and we can talk.
I have. Never assume. You know what they say about that. For ten of my twenty two years in the Corps I worked on the side as an LEO for JPD.
__________________

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, 03:33 PM   #24
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
Yeah, lets see here. Guy wearing a suit walking along and you draw your firearm on him.

The only way I can see the cop being justified in drawing on him is if the guy threatened the cop. But from the cops own words we can see that didn't happen.



I never said I would. I said that if he had done that where I come up he would have likely been shot. Your actions have concequences. If you choose to threaten the wrong person where I came up you have to live with those concequences.

I have. Never assume. You know what they say about that. For ten of my twenty two years in the Corps I worked on the side as an LEO for JPD.
#1 - Ok, point one. Guy in suit walking along and cop covers the subject on a stop, oh yeah you forgot the the officer saw a weapon on the subject and it was a high crime area. The totality of the circumstances remember not pick and choose.

#2 - From the cops own words. Lets see,,,, oh yeah the cops words as reported by the lawyer and the media.. and we all know that lawyers and the media tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The point is we only have one side of the incident.

#3 - You keep saying where you grew up you threaten the wrong person you would likely have gotten shot. Where is this? Society has laws, society designates LEO’s to enforce those laws, cops don’t have ESP and criminals don’t wear special clothing or have signs and as I said to protect society from those predators cops sometime stop people innocent of violations. Again I refer to #1, totality of circumstances and we don’t have all the facts of what happened and are only getting one side of the incident.

#4 - You say never assume, I agree that’s why I say I can see how the cop stopped the gentleman and how he could have covered the subject. YOU are also assuming, I refer to post above about what the cop said and where you come from the cop would likely be shot, ect. I have to assume in my job or I would probably not be alive today. After all I go looking for the worse of society and hope when I find it I am prepared.

#5 - Thank you for your service in the Corp, however, being a military MP on an installation is totally different from being a civilian police officer outside a base. Military bases are a controlled environment where it is normal practice that people don’t carry guns. Even lawful concealed carry is controlled by the installation commander and military members can be held accountable for violations of base regulations if the base commander does not allow it. You as a MP know pretty much who is on the base and do not deal with the extent of the unknown as what is encountered daily outside. Military training and response procedures are different then civilian police. I have dealt with this with former military police that were hired by us and were indoctrinated by the military to never draw their weapon under threat of court marshal. But again I would expect you to understand totality of the circumstances in an incident and not make over sweeping judgments on an incident without them. For the last time, I’m not judging the cop or the lawyer, however, I will say that there is more here than the simple tale told by the lawyer and the media. I would like to read the court transcript.
__________________
"I never killed anyone who didn't need killing."
JW Hardin
Dzscubie is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 03:46 PM   #25
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
robocop10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Austin,Texas, by God!!
Posts: 10,009
Liked 2694 Times on 1408 Posts
Likes Given: 216

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.
You have never worn a badge.

Pointing a firearm at someone for a lawful reason IS NOT deadly/lethal force. If an officer waits for the suspected bad guy to "go for his gun" before the officer does, the officer will be called DEAD!

Concealed carry means that...concealed. If you are "printing', it is not concealed. If it is seen "for a brief second", it is not concealed. The story said he had a concealed carry permit. He had a duty to keep it concealed.

If I see a person carrying a semi-concealed weapon I CAN draw and point the gun at that person, disarm him and investigate further.

WTS...Is that a good idea. Almost always not. I have seen numerous people carrying handguns that are printing or a seen "for a brief second". NEVER have I drawn down on these people. There is a bunch more information that needs to be processed before that. Does he look like a thug or a reasonable citizen? Is the current environment safe to confront or can I make matters worse by confronting the individual. If he is likely to be a thug carrying illegally, is he alone? Is there a possiblity he has armed associates nearby that are going to shoot me in the back of the head? Is he possibly an off duty or undercover cop? I need to assess the situation for a while before making that decision.

I do know officers that have the mentality expressed by this officer. "I'm the only one allowed to be armed on this beat". That attitude is plain wrong. It is arrogant and stupid. It is an attitude that is perpetuated by many police academies. Common sense is uncommon. Officers with that attitude make police work difficult to do because the public begins to not trust the police.

To conclude, were the officer's actions lawful? Yes. Were they smart? Hell no!
__________________

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

robocop10mm is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 04:21 PM   #26
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
kusterleXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Hopkinsville,Kentucky
Posts: 453
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 9

Default

The pissing match is in full swing! The very reason why our 2nd Amendment rights are in peril is because we fight amongst ourselves on trivial matters (what constitutes lethal force) while the unified leftists hack away at our right to even carry at all. Let's just agree to disagree on this issue and present a unified front to fight of the left-leaning crazies.

__________________

"When in doubt [use] C4." -Jamie Hyneman (Mythbusters)

kusterleXD is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 05:55 PM   #27
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mr. Bluesky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houghton,MI
Posts: 485
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robocop10mm View Post
To conclude, were the officer's actions lawful? Yes. Were they smart? Hell no!
IMO, let's agree on this. The judge had to uphold it because the officer WAS acting within the law, if only just. I would imagine that, if it was deemed necessary by the cop's superiors, who are probably more familiar with the facts than the news is, he would be sternly reprimanded for his attitude.
__________________

Last edited by Mr. Bluesky; 01-05-2010 at 05:58 PM.
Mr. Bluesky is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 06:27 PM   #28
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,170
Liked 5732 Times on 3358 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

I was disappointed by this. I wonder to this moment if the officer knew of the defense attorney and perhaps held a grudge against him due to a previous case (BIG supposition on my part). I think this was a nitpicky waste of taxpayer dollars. I wonder what more serious crimes (used loosely) that officer could've been preventing or investigating during the 10 minute~ stop and the untold hours the officer spent in court over a momentary glimpse of a pistol that should have been kept fully concealed in that jurisdiction, as far as i know ATM.

I also wonder what would stop a LEO with a grudge and knowledge of a person's status as a legal concealed carrier in a jurisdiction with no provision for open carry from falsely claiming to have seen the person's firearm "print" or "flash"? I guess the only thing other than a neck-cam for the officer would be the officer's professionalism, which seems to be at a very low ebb in this particular case.

Since the officer disarmed an attorney in a "high crime" area, i also wonder what would've happened if that attorney had been physically assaulted and injured shortly thereafter, particularly given the litigious nature ascribed to most attorneys. IOW, what if the lawyer got stabbed during a subsequent mugging & sued that county, city, state, etc? How many taxpayer dollars would that waste?

The seizure may have been legal, but it certainly seems unwise to me, not just as a bruise upon the 2nd amendment but also as an unnecessary risk to the taxpayers and that department's reputation.

__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 09:32 PM   #29
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
robocop10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Austin,Texas, by God!!
Posts: 10,009
Liked 2694 Times on 1408 Posts
Likes Given: 216

Default

Let me be clear here. I am a huge proponent of the 2nd Ammendment (double entendre intended). I am a life member of the NRA. Personally, I would like to see every qualified person in the country trained and carrying a handgun, concealed. An armed society is a polite society. In 25+ years as a peace officer I have arrested exactly ONE person for unlawfully carrying a weapon (handgun). He was a drug addicted scumbag that has since been killed by other officers in a gun battle. HE needed to go to jail. I have counceled with, educated and otherwise enlightened countless other citizens on their rights and responsibilities as to firearms in Texas and sent them on their merry way.
I am the exception. I also understand that I do not work in LA, Detroit, NYC, Miami or any other arm pit city in this country. I have not had to shoot my way out of a bad situation, I have the luxury of talking my way out. For me (or anyone else) to second guess an officer in "X" jurisdiction on his handling of a situation is unfair to "his" reality. It may not seem proper based on our reality, but we have no way of understanding his reality.

The SCOTUS has repeatedly sided with LE in situation like this because to place limits on one officer in a given situation in one jurisdiction places the same restriction on EVERY officer in every jurisdiction in the US.

__________________

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

robocop10mm is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2010, 11:27 PM   #30
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JonM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rochester WI,Rochester WI
Posts: 17,414
Liked 5511 Times on 2878 Posts
Likes Given: 358

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. .
im an EX-MP from almost 20 years ago. i was taught that what the officer did was presentation of deadly force in the use of force doctrine i was taught. use of deadly force is the next step and last one.

anyway the lawyer in my opinion was probably treated more harshly than warranted but he actually did break the law in that his pistol was observed when no threat of life or property was present. i am sure that the lawyer verbally escalated the situation on his own rather than comply with the officer.

it is also people like that lawyer that need to be reigned in because rather than just manning up and saying yeah i was wrong i let my weapon show and co-operate with the law he decided to sue the state for lots of money in a cash grab against the tax payers for something he caused.

the officer's reaction in today's day and age when random loonies roam the streets looking for a good spot to crank off a baxillion rounds on innocent folks is understandable and disapointingly expected. the lawyers response by trying to rook the taxpayers for a situation he caused and most likely escalated is equally tragic.
__________________
JonM 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