California Officer in Hot Water Over Comment About Citizens Carrying Guns

Discussion in 'The Club House' started by SigGambler, Feb 14, 2010.

  1. SigGambler

    SigGambler New Member

    77
    0
    0
    Sometimes it isn't good to speak your mind, especially on a website!

    Gun Rights Advocates Target California Detective Following Facebook Posts - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com


    Gun Rights Advocates Target California Detective Following Facebook Posts
    Sunday , February 14, 2010

    By Joshua Rhett Miller


    Gun rights advocates have a California police detective in their crosshairs after he apparently posted comments on Facebook advocating that "open carry" supporters should be shot.

    East Palo Alto Police Det. Rod Tuason apparently posted the remarks on his Facebook page in response to a friend's status update, which suggested that gun advocates who carry unloaded weapons openly — which is legal in California — should do so in places like "Oakland, Richmond and East Palo Alto" and not just in "hoity toity" cities.

    "Haha we had one guy last week try to do it!" Tuason replied. "He got proned out [laid face-down on the ground] and reminded where he was at and that turds will jack him for his gun in a heartbeat!"

    Several comments later, the detective suggested shooting the gun rights advocates, some of whom have carried firearms openly in recent weeks in California's Bay Area, particularly at Starbucks locations.

    "Sounds like you had someone practicing their 2nd amendment rights last night!" Tuason wrote. "Should've pulled the AR out and prone them all out! And if one of them makes a furtive movement … 2 weeks off!!!" -- referring to the modified duty, commonly known as desk duty, that typically follows any instance in which an officer is investigated for firing his weapon.

    Those comments caught the attention of a California attorney and blogger, as well as a Virginia man who started a Facebook group calling for Tuason's termination.

    John Taylor, whose Facebook group had 54 members as of midday Friday, said the Facebook thread confirmed gun owners' worst fears.

    "Any sworn officer who suggests shooting law-abiding citizens for exercising their most basic constitutional rights deserves the full wrath of America's gun owners," Taylor told FoxNews.com. "It's an affront."

    California's Penal Code makes it illegal to carry concealed weapons without a county-issued license. But it is legal to carry an unloaded weapon in plain view in a holster. In most cases, it is illegal for an unconcealed weapon to be loaded.

    Taylor, of Arlington, Va., who has a concealed weapons permit in his home state, said he planned to write a letter to the East Palo Alto Police Department demanding that Tuason be fired.

    "The targeting, harassment and intimidation of law-abiding citizens who are peacefully agitating for their rights by a police officer is an abomination to the Constitution, and is in fact the exact reason our Founding Fathers created the Second Amendment," Taylor said. "Police officers who think they are going to get between law-abiding Americans and their Second Amendment rights are going to find themselves in the line of fire."

    Tuason's comments were first noticed by California attorney Kevin Thomason, who posted a screen grab of the detective's remarks on his Web site on Sunday.

    "[Tuason] didn't realize that actual PRO-GUN people also read Facebook," Thomason wrote. "Amazingly, he posted the following comment about law abiding gun owners on a friend's page. Basically, he's saying 'prone them out' (face down on the ground), and if anyone moves, kill them. I don't make this crap up."

    Thomason, a member of the National Rifle Association, wrote that Tuason's comments were "worth a call" to the East Palo Alto City Council, as well as to his superior officers.

    Tuason, who has since removed his Facebook profile, did not return messages seeking comment on Friday. He is reportedly being investigated by the police department's professional standards division regarding the Facebook remarks.

    East Palo Alto Police Sgt. Rod Norris said he was unable to comment on the matter, but Capt. Carl Estelle told the San Jose Mercury News that police officials must be careful not to violate Tuason's First Amendment rights, since the comments appeared on his personal Web site.

    "In no way are his personal comments reflective of any policies or procedures here at the department nor does he speak for the police department," Estelle told the newspaper.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2010
  2. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    3
    0
    The fact that I would never carry an unloaded firearm in public notwithstanding, the guy's a jerkoff.

    It is also emblematic of the attitudes that we, as gun owners in California face regularly.
     

  3. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    I have to say, this is somewhat surprising.

    Not that the cops feel this way. Not that a cop in KALIFORNIA feels this way.

    But that a Detective Grade Officer would be DUMB ENOUGH to post this sh!t on Facebook?!?! :eek:

    This is a lay up for us on the 2A Front. This guy is going to be "scape goat to appease the Right" of the moment.

    Sure, having him removedfrom his little seat of tenious power is great, but how about all those he thought he was speaking for??

    The fact is, this guy thought he was speaking for the majority of people that he interacted with on a regular basis. That alone is enough to make me worry.

    I fear that this biased view is more commonly shared behind the walls of power than anyone would let us believe.

    And that scares me even more. :mad:

    JD
     
  4. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    3
    0
    I agree JD, he just happened to drop trou publicly.
     
  5. skullcrusher

    skullcrusher New Member

    10,888
    1
    0
    Police Officers are Police Officers 24/7/365 (366 in leap years), and posting anything like this on Facebook is reflective of his department, imo. He made some scary remarks about the treatment of law abiding citizens.

    This could be good for 2A or it could take on a life with the uber anti's touting his words as a slogan.

    I believe he should be removed or at least demoted and censured by his department. If I lived in his jurisdiction, I would be fearful of an officer like him deciding he/she was judge and jury. Bad people live on both sides of the law. 2A is a Constitutional right, not something some boisterous cop decides it is.
     
  6. cpttango30

    cpttango30 New Member

    13,934
    3
    0
    JD your not on facebook are you?

    I am facebook friends with many of the young ladies I work with. OMG some of the crap that they post on there like a picture of 15 of them in a hot tub all in skimpy bikini's. Now on a personal level I am not complaining but they are teachers and parents can find them. Just a slippery slope.

    I have a buddy here that didn't get hired for a job because he made a post on his myspace page about a trainee that was just dumb as a bock of rocks. He didn't use any names dates or anything that would ID the student. Still they said it was not professional and told him other than that he was a perfect fit for the job.


    SOunds to me like some one needs to prone him out.

    Hey maybe we can bring a few London bobbies over and they can dress up as burglars and break into his house and drag him out of his bed in the middle of the night and prone him out in his skivvies in the front yard.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2010
  7. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    Tango, who are you asking here? OF COURSE I am not on Facebook... LOL

    There are NO mentions of my real name for the first 3 pages of Google and I am quite happy to keep it that way.

    My woman works in HR for the Dark Empire ( MSFT ) and before that she worked for 2 other companies that were on the FORBES Top 100 companies in an HR role.

    Those companies' ROUTINELY scout potential new hires by interwebz research and if you have some dumb ass web-blog about how you do this or that, guess what. No job for you....

    In a professional world, having every random thought and random opinion right out there in the open is a SURE FIRE way to get yourself in deep sh*t in my opinion.

    But hey, if you dig it, more power to you....

    JD
     
  8. DarinCraft

    DarinCraft New Member

    1,159
    0
    0
    Good job you effing douche. Aside from the fact this guy is a craptacular piece of $hit and is a horrible example of police officers, what happens when this idiot shoots someone on duty? Even if it is justified with this in his jacket, he will get crucified. Not to mention if an officer in the near future shoots an armed but unloaded citizen.

    Even though facebook is "private." it could easily be argued in court that it is public just by the shear number of people who can view it. i.e. it may be posted to a friend, but when a friend posts on it, their friends can see it and so on. So what was between friends is now between thousands of people.

    I won't even go into the fact that LE are LE 24/7 and their conduct off duty should be the same as if you were in a patrol car with the COP in the passenger seat. I may be retired, but my ID says "Retired Officer." My COP was very specific that I was still an officer and will conduct myself as such.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2010
  9. DarinCraft

    DarinCraft New Member

    1,159
    0
    0
    and another thing, If facebook is not public then how did the news get a hold of it and how did the attorney that does not know him see it?
     
  10. skullcrusher

    skullcrusher New Member

    10,888
    1
    0
    How do you really feel, Darin? Feel free to let it out. :D
     
  11. DarinCraft

    DarinCraft New Member

    1,159
    0
    0
    LOL...yeah I'm sorry, but I hate it when LE does crap like this. It is always a bay area cop that does this crap. It pieves me because when I talked to people who have these wild a$$ opinions about cops and what they do it usually stems from some stupid incident like this.

    My own father in law has all these opinions about cops and public employees and most if it is because idiot cops who made the news.

    Sorry I shouldn't get so worked up.
     
  12. zhuk

    zhuk New Member

    2,031
    0
    0

    He should move to this country & feel right at home lol
     
  13. AcidFlashGordon

    AcidFlashGordon New Member

    1,657
    0
    0
    Oh, that's an ouch sandwich for you folks in Oz. That has to suck..... :(
     
  14. IGETEVEN

    IGETEVEN New Member

    8,358
    4
    0
    There is nothing private on the Interwebz people that a court can't get a supena for to access. Face book, My Space, twitter, cell phones, computers, laptops, youtube, forums and even your bank accounts and credit card transactions. Nothing is secure on the Interwebz, it is a public domain, and unless it is encrypted and protected, you may be somewhat protected. A court order can still be acquired for those, and hackers can gain access to all your private information, as well. But wait.....there's more!

    Keep posting them private pictures and youtube videos. All of them online social forums are public domain and are monitored. Surprise!! :eek:

    Just a "FYI" this is a information post taken from my QP forum:

    "Thinking of joining Special Forces?

    Want to earn the honor of wearing that Green Beret or maybe becoming a Navy Seal?


    Then do yourself a favor, remove your MySpace.com and Facebook.com web pages.


    Don’t want to or don’t care?


    Fine.


    But do not expect to ever be selected for any covert or clandestine missions, period. (It ain’t going to happen when millions already know your face and name.)


    Oh, and those classified counter-terrorist units people whisper about. Forget it, not a snowball's chance in hell of you joining after posting your face and name all over the internet.


    You had a web page and now removed it, you might still be able to join…but forget the classified missions or covert unit assignments. Again, it ain’t going to happen.


    You do understand how Google, Yahoo, MSN, etc use the "archive mode" to save all your information, right?


    We do…and our enemies do, too!


    Just type in Professionalsoldiers.com right after the http:// on this web page:


    Internet Archive: Wayback Machine


    Your MySpace.com and Facebook.com web pages will be on the internet for decades to come and you’ll continue to wonder, "Why didn’t I get selected for some of those classified missions?"


    You can bet that every time one of you place your face on a web page and you state you just signed up to be an 18X, or Seal training, some hostile foreign intelligence service just made a file on you.


    HOIS = hostile foreign intelligence service
    http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp1_02.pdf (Do a google search on "hostile foreign intelligence service")

    You don’t have to believe me; you’ll know when you’re not selected to go on certain missions or refused to join some units.


    OK, you’ve been warned and remember.........

    "Life is tough but it’s tougher when you’re stupid."


    This has been a Team Sergeant 18X public service announcement."


    The sad and real fact is people, you do not even have to be planning a career in an SOF branch area at all. Anything and everything anyone posts, on the public Interwebz, every bit of that information, including personal opinions, is search obtainable, collected and stored and can be accessed for what ever reason and cause by the government, or any other powerful entity, that sees fit to obtain it and use it.

    Jack
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2010
  15. dunerunner

    dunerunner New Member

    8,411
    3
    0
    A comment about civilians exercising their rights to carry openly in "East Palialto"!! :eek:

    No one in their right mind would openly carry an unloaded weapon in East Palialto!!

    And maybe one of you California members could verify for me, isn't a loaded magazine considered a loaded weapon in Kali? So you wouldn't even have ready access to ammunition anyway. It's a dangerous game made even more dangerous by the inane laws in California.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2010
  16. M14sRock

    M14sRock New Member

    5,549
    0
    0
    I have not checked in many years, but it used to be that a loaded magazine AND the gun it went to constituted a "loaded gun".

    Handguns must be transported in a locked container (there is no definition of what type of container or lock), separated from the ammunition. And with so many of the old school, common sense, LEO's retiring gun owners cannot be too careful in CA.
     
  17. robocop10mm

    robocop10mm Lifetime Supporting Member Lifetime Supporter

    11,380
    1
    0
    The Detective opened his big yap in a public forum that he was too unsophisticated to realize was a PUBLIC FORUM. He might talk that was to his fellow officers but not at a public meeting. He is just stupid.
    We cannot fix his opinion. He has the WRONG opinions about guns. He is entitled to his WRONG opinions.


    WTS...he is still a douche.
     
  18. Dzscubie

    Dzscubie New Member

    2,508
    0
    0
    You just can’t fix stupid.
     
  19. DarinCraft

    DarinCraft New Member

    1,159
    0
    0
    yep, what he said is right. PC 12025 says a concealable firearms shall not be concealed in public. PC 12031 says any firearm shall not be loaded in public. The term loaded mean when the ammo is readily accessible or within a reasonable distance of the firearm. i.e. gun in a holster, mag in your pocket. Therefore, a CA can carry a firearm in public, but it cannot be loaded or concealed (If it is concealable). If you do it, let alone in EPA your an idiot. EPA, Oakland, Hayward are pretty much Compton with different names.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2010
  20. M14sRock

    M14sRock New Member

    5,549
    0
    0
    A good friend of mine several years ago was arrested in his driveway. He was carrying rifles from his house to his car parked in the driveway.
    1) The rifles were all legal.
    2) The rifles were all inside cases.
    3) The rifles were all unloaded.

    The reason LAPD arrested him? They said that a neighbor called them and felt that guns in cases were threatening to have around. So my friend was arrested for "Brandishing a weapon in a threatening manner".

    We all took up a donation for his legal expenses and he beat it in court. But it took almost a year, his guns sat in the pokie for that time, and the monetary expense was several thousand dollar$.