Wrongfully Arrested in Vancouver WA - Page 7
You are Unregistered, please register to use all of the features of FirearmsTalk.com!    
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism >

Wrongfully Arrested in Vancouver WA


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-21-2014, 04:18 AM   #61
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mercator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 10,731
Liked 5693 Times on 3809 Posts
Likes Given: 2943

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rjd3282 View Post
There is a huge difference between carrying and brandishing. Nobody here said it was ok to brandish. Changing words is not the way to debate honestly. That's what libs do and I know you aren't a lib because I've pushed the like button on your posts too many times for that.
Change it to exposing with unclear intent. The cops did their job. I've seen such video provocations before. In this country the cops are so bad, mucking with them is a sport.
Mercator is offline  
 
Old 07-21-2014, 04:54 AM   #62
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SSGN_Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 5,567
Liked 3168 Times on 1878 Posts
Likes Given: 795

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rjd3282 View Post
It's not reasonable doc, it's paranoia. When some nut drives his car through a play ground, do the police start stopping everybody with a car? I mean what the hell, everybody drives down the street in their cars and way more people are killed by cars than by guns. Cars aren't even a constitutional right. Look how many people are stabbed every year but we don't hear about back ground checks to buy a knife. You don't hear about knife registrations. No body thinks it would be a good idea to store their kitchen knives in a knife safe. If some wacko goes nuts with his AK would you rather have your pocket 380 or your AR? It happens, it just happened with that nasty bank robbery. You wouldn't bring a knife to a gun fight so why bring a pistol to a rifle fight. So far none of you guys that think it isn't reasonable to carry a long gun hasn't given any reason other than it might scare or piss off a liberal. I'm sorry but making a liberal wet himself isn't a good enough reason to violate any ones constitutional rights.
And I'm not saying he doesn't have the right to carry it. The sad reality is that a few nut jobs have made people scared. Walking near areas where people gather with an exposed long gun may make people nervous. Nervous folks who don't carry call cops. Being aware of time, place and current events is also a part of situational awareness.

Anyone choosing to carry a rifle openly should be aware of the risks. They may still exercise their right. It doesn't change the inconvenient fact that society today's is not as accepting. Not saying it is right, not saying I agree or like it. Just stating the observation of facts.

I've carried a rifle on foot a ways. But it was cased. No one cared.

As a person who carries. If I saw someone walking down the street with a rifle, I'm going to pay attention.
SSGN_Doc is offline  
2
People Like This 
Old 07-21-2014, 10:34 AM   #63
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
clr8ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Central NH
Posts: 4,015
Liked 1341 Times on 897 Posts
Likes Given: 860

Default

The way I understand it it that if the cops get a complaint about something they HAVE to go check it out. And when they did show up, they were pretty nice to that guy. So HE'S the one who escalated this whole thing.

I still have not gotten any opinions on my earlier question; at what point do the cops have every right to see your ID?Where is DeltaF? He always has some good insight into these things. Is he still around?
__________________
I don't see what the problem is. Everybody is being nice, and getting along, and I, for one, am learning stuff. So, if you don't like the discussion, don't look at the thread. Or, simply cut to the chase, and close it.
_________________
Is there an age limit for a thread, after which we kill it?
clr8ter is offline  
2
People Like This 
Old 07-21-2014, 11:10 AM   #64
Big TOW
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
WebleyFosbery38's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Irish Settlement CNY
Posts: 7,506
Liked 8292 Times on 4264 Posts
Likes Given: 9557

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clr8ter View Post
I still have not gotten any opinions on my earlier question; at what point do the cops have every right to see your ID?
Probable cause is the key to that answer but its become a shaky bridge too many LEO's cross without actual cause in my book. Too many people, too few LEO's is the biggest problem, they cant know their beat or the people that live there when they are covering 50 city blocks or 100 square miles of non city turf, your probably gonna be deemed an unknown risk to them even if your not really a risk to anyone.

Im pretty sure Im never going to try to make my point against a LEO face to face. They dont make the laws and they are rightfully worried about living through their shift more than they are concerned about your specific rights at any given moment.
WebleyFosbery38 is offline  
3
People Like This 
Old 07-21-2014, 12:15 PM   #65
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MisterMcCool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumfugg, Egypt
Posts: 11,200
Liked 10382 Times on 5539 Posts
Likes Given: 22240

Default

DeltaF was on last week. Maybe he will return soon.


No offense and none taken
__________________
No offense and none taken (̿▀̿ ̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄
MisterMcCool is offline  
Axxe55 Likes This 
Old 07-21-2014, 01:38 PM   #66
The Apocalypse Is Coming.....
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 7
Liked 22395 Times on 12494 Posts
Likes Given: 53672

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WebleyFosbery38 View Post
Probable cause is the key to that answer but its become a shaky bridge too many LEO's cross without actual cause in my book. Too many people, too few LEO's is the biggest problem, they cant know their beat or the people that live there when they are covering 50 city blocks or 100 square miles of non city turf, your probably gonna be deemed an unknown risk to them even if your not really a risk to anyone.

Im pretty sure Im never going to try to make my point against a LEO face to face. They dont make the laws and they are rightfully worried about living through their shift more than they are concerned about your specific rights at any given moment.
i agree. in all honesty and fairness, LEO's just want to get through their day like anyone else and go home to their families.

if, (big IF here) a LEO violates, or you felt your rights are being violated, the time and place to argue that issue is not face to face with that officer. doing so, (again, big IF your rights are being violated) can escalate the situation to the point you are no longer in the right and his actions are justified.

the time and place to argue the issue is with a lawyer and his superiors. if, (again big IF) an LEO steps beyond his legal authority or violates your rights, you need to file a complaint with his superiors. if an officer is abusing his authority, or violating people's rights, the only way they know of this is if people file complaints against him. if complaints of his actions are coming from sevral sources, they will investigate these claims and if they are true, most likely he will end up fired.
Axxe55 is offline  
3
People Like This 
Old 07-21-2014, 02:00 PM   #67
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 13,500
Liked 10224 Times on 5494 Posts
Likes Given: 10096

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WebleyFosbery38 View Post
Probable cause is the key to that answer but its become a shaky bridge too many LEO's cross without actual cause in my book.

Too many people, too few LEO's is the biggest problem, they cant know their beat or the people that live there when they are covering 50 city blocks or 100 square miles of non city turf,

BINGO!

your probably gonna be deemed an unknown risk to them even if your not really a risk to anyone.

Im pretty sure Im never going to try to make my point against a LEO face to face. They dont make the laws and they are rightfully worried about living through their shift more than they are concerned about your specific rights at any given moment.

Sometimes there is a very fine line between "reasonable suspicion" and "probable cause."

An LEO with any common sense will always take the side of caution and safety.
__________________
History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster.
Douglas MacArthur



If you think a strong military is expensive, think about what a weak one would cost
locutus is offline  
2
People Like This 
Old 07-21-2014, 02:34 PM   #68
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Madison, AL
Posts: 64
Liked 58 Times on 31 Posts
Likes Given: 133

Default

From Terry v. Ohio, Supreme Court - June 10, 1967:

Quote:
The Fourth Amendment provides that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. . . ." This inestimable right of [p9] personal security belongs as much to the citizen on the streets of our cities as to the homeowner closeted in his study to dispose of his secret affairs. For as this Court has always recognized,

No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded, by the common law than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law.
This notion that "there is a law" against the mere presence of a gun being all that is necessary to create "reasonable articulable suspicion" (RAS) was settled by the above SCOTUS ruling, and whether OC'ed or CC'ed, mere presence/possession of a gun does not reach that threshold as long as the carrier is in a place where legal to carry in the manner he is carrying. The ruling said that when an officer makes a Terry Stop, the officer must have a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a crime, is about to commit a crime, or is committing a crime. In WA State, where this incident happened, OC is not only legal as regards both long arms and handguns, but it is nearly as ubiquitous as in AZ where it has been practiced with zero interruptions by law or by societal "norms" since Statehood.

In short, the only "jerks" or law-breakers in the subject-video are those wearing uniforms and badges.

In order for one to be a true law-enforcement "supporter," they must first be a supporter of the law. If you support the actions of the cops in the subject-video, you support lawlessness by Vancouver, WA cops. There is no "in-between." Cops who act outside the law are law-breakers, not law-enforcers. This was not a valid Terry Stop by any legal definition, and seizing the citizen's personal property (his phone) and keeping it hidden for a year preventing him from preparing his defense is an unconscionable violation of law under our Constitution. Anyone standing up for these lawless thugs should be ashamed of themselves. This is nothing short of fascism on display.

CzarChasm

ETA:

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
An LEO with any common sense will always take the side of caution and safety.
While their sworn duty is to the Constitution and protecting the citizens' God-given rights. Who cares what their rationale is about safety etc. if what they're rationalizing is lawlessness?
__________________
Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to Police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

Last edited by CzarChasm; 07-21-2014 at 02:39 PM. Reason: Added content.
CzarChasm is offline  
WNGMSTR Likes This 
Old 07-21-2014, 03:16 PM   #69
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Free State of Winston, AL
Posts: 4,100
Liked 2728 Times on 1638 Posts
Likes Given: 1612

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercator View Post
Change it to exposing with unclear intent. The cops did their job. I've seen such video provocations before. In this country the cops are so bad, mucking with them is a sport.
No they did not. If they had released him with out charging him they would have done their job. They WAY they over reacted in the initial contact tainted the entire contact. I have been directly involved in many contacts similar to this one and had ZERO problems even with activists like this guy.
I make this observation with over 40 years of STREET LE experience to base it on. This total over reaction by LEO's to the mere sight of a 'gun' is the problem.
Activists will continue to 'test' the government/LE this way and as long as LE miss handle it like this the worse it will get.
__________________
An armed society is not always a polite society, but it is a free and safe society!
Self Defense is an absolute and natural right!
Keep your head down and your powder dry!

Last edited by JimRau; 07-21-2014 at 08:59 PM.
JimRau is offline  
4
People Like This 
Old 07-21-2014, 04:15 PM   #70
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Defiant_one's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: PNW
Posts: 559
Liked 595 Times on 283 Posts
Likes Given: 100

Default I want to paint some scenarios - let you decide

Not looking to argue, just being realistic.

If the police officers went up to this man and he was carrying nothing, just wanking along, and demanded ID, they would be way outside the box and violating his rights.

In the current scenario, they went overboard and really set him up, I grant that.

But lets take a scenario some would have liked to see.

He is walking in front of a building with a rifle. His car is parked there. Police roll up.

What are you doing ?
I am expressing my second amendment rights.
Do you have any id ?
I don't have to show you my id.
Where are you going ?
I don't have to tell you.
Okay, have a nice day.

The police drive off. The man now enters the building and begins shooting the people inside where he has been laid off from that company.

All of this later comes to light. What happens to the LEO's? Do you think it will all be just a case of "they did their job right ?". Hell no...those folks are going to get barbecued, skinned and spit out of a meat grinder.

In fact, it will most likely lead to new laws that WILL allow greater latitude on search and questions.

What no one seems to understand is that there is a utopian view of rights and the real world cases. Our friends the LEO's have no way of knowing if you are good old citizen exercising your rights or Joe Nutjob. Why would anyone want to make it difficult for them ?

Showing your id is a rational CHOICE. It is a choice, no one disputes that, but if we spend our lives making everyone else's life harder, public outcry will ensure you lose some of that ability.

The lion is laying passively in the cage, but if you poke him in the nose every time he yawns, that yawn may just turn into a bite.

Nuff said.
__________________
"All war must be just the killing of strangers against whom you feel no personal animosity; strangers whom, in other circumstances, you would help if you found them in trouble, and who would help you if you needed it" Mark Twain
Defiant_one is offline  
6
People Like This 
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
NYS man arrested jjfuller1 New York Gun Forum 47 11-06-2013 07:40 AM
NYC, arrested for toy gun TankTop Firearms in the Media 2 05-12-2013 01:27 AM
Council Member MELTDOWN Highlights - Vancouver City, WA Poink88 The Club House 10 10-03-2010 05:29 PM
Man cited for open carry in Vancouver,WA. Gojubrian General Handgun Discussion 15 03-30-2010 05:47 PM