"My" run in with the law.

[LadyFish]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

... here they make you stop, and ask if you have any fruit

Please don't tempt me with a line like that. LOL

 

[aspeck]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

I have followed this thread with interest. There have been some very good points made, and for the most part, the tone has been kept civil (and guys, don't mess with "The Fish," she is a blonde dynamo who doesn't need a firearm to be considered armed and dangerous!).

Just some random points to ponder ... I guess I will say random because I am not sure where I come down on this one ... maybe a little bit of everything that has been said ...

1.) There are ALWAYS 2 sides to every story. I am not saying that Bubba has told a lie, or misrepresented the truth in any manner. From his perspective, I believe everything he has said. However, his perspective does not give us the offending officers side of the equation. Was there an annonymous tip of a drug deal going down in the area with a vehicle that matched Bubba's description? Was there a terroristic threat and the vehicle was close to Bubba's description? Was there a kidnapping of a young child with the description ... I think you get the point. The officers might not tell you why they are focusing on you and your vehicle at the time if there is a risk of danger to someone.

2.) We need police officers, just like we need soldiers. Co-operation with them is important. Ladyfish has a valid point that although the strong arm tactics used should not be accepted, or allowed to continue, there is a time and a place for everything. Supervisors need to know, and if there is no satisfaction, your complaint needs to go up the chain of command, to the Chief of Police and eventually the Governor, if need be.

3.) To those who have risked their life, or have had family members and/or friends risk life and limb to protect our freedoms, thank-you. We, in turn, must do our part to keep those freedoms alive and well.

4.) Freedom and democracy bring out the passion in all of us. We all have our own thoughts on what it means to be free and to exercise those rights. It is important that we understand that we are free to hold on to our differences, and that my rights end at your nose, and your rights end at my nose.

5.) Right to Carry, Castle Doctrine, et al have been enacted in different states with different definitions. One brush doesn't paint them all. A conceal carry permit means I have permission to carry a concealed weapon. It doesn't mean I can use it whenever I want, or that I can be careless with it. I must use constraint and respect the weapon and others around me when I am carrying. I have several LEO friends who like that I often carry. They thank me. But they are quick to let me know that if there is a LEO who doesn't know me, and the weapon is seen, or they know I have a permit, I should let them know what is up right away to avoid any confusion. Too many druggies and non-law abiding citizens around make the LEO "pucker factor" high when a weapon is near. Recently had a Wildlife Conservation Officer killled in the line of duty while making a stop of a suspected jacklighter. An FBI agent was killed last year in a raid. This is rural PA ... both about a hundred miles from me in opposite directions. Puts LEOs on edge when things like this happen. It is up to us to help to defuse the situation and show them that 99% of us are on their side, not trying to trip them up. (Not saying this is what Bubba did. Not saying that AT ALL! Just looking at another part of the equation.)

and lastly ...

6.) To all who have contributed to this thread, thank-you for a thought provoking discussion. It has been informative and enlightning. I will stop my random thoughts of a lunatic now ...

 

[shoestring]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

I like the wording cops use. "can I" or "you don't mind if I search your vehicle?" my answer is no. and when the cop asks why i tell him because if he had a legal reason to search my vehicle, he wouldn't need my permission. cops carry recorders on their person, so if you file a complaint, be perfectly honest. the cop will let his supervisor listen to the recording for his defense and try to make you out to be a liar.

 

[DaNinja]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

I'm glad I popped back in to check the thread.
It reminded me that I had left my Glock in the truck.

 

[LadyFish]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

I like the wording cops use. "can I" or "you don't mind if I search your vehicle?" my answer is no. and when the cop asks why i tell him because if he had a legal reason to search my vehicle, he wouldn't need my permission. cops carry recorders on their person, so if you file a complaint, be perfectly honest. the cop will let his supervisor listen to the recording for his defense and try to make you out to be a liar.

Even in my little seaside town of 1,500 the cops wear a video recorder in their pocket. You can't even see it. There is a tiny whole in the pocket for the camera to see out of.

 

[LippCJ7]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

Ok I have now seen everything, I can die happy knowing there is nothing left in life to see

Thank you aspeck for proving to the world that you are not just the site comedian, you are also its voice of reason.

 

[LadyFish]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

Art, thanks for clarifying what I was trying to say.

 

[aspeck]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

Art, thanks for clarifying what I was trying to say.

Does that make up for all the blonde jokes?

 

[aspeck]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

... you are also its voice of reason.

Ouch, that hurts!

 

[LadyFish]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

All very good points.

Honestly, this topic and incident is very subjective based on precipitating factors of all parties involved and those reading this thread.

I do agree that when people like you DO stand up, its a wake up call to 'good cops' and reminds them not to abuse their power, that we too have rights.

Not sure I agree with the 'man thing' since I too will not let a man walk up to me and give me orders or go through my personal effects. LMAO

 

[LadyFish]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

umm, i had to add a disclosure statement. Better go back and read it.

:d hahahaha

 

[I Fish]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

I got to thinking about this thing, and man, I guess a lot of other people have too! In Ohio, when you get your license plate or registration, and, if you read the fine print of the document you have to sign and agree to, you are giving up any right to refuse a search of your vehicle. Ohio considers a license plate a privilege, not a right. So, if this had happened in Ohio, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Funny thing is, I don't know anybody, besides myself, that has taken the time to read all of it. The ladies behind the desk at the BMV, and the people in line behind you, get pretty agitated when you hold up the line trying to figure out what you are really signing. And, conveniently enough, the document you leave with makes no mention of what you just agreed to or the document you just had to sign.

Second, I think the main reason the OP, and everyone on their side, is really mad at the fact that the police can, will, and do, lie to you and me. Of course, it's all OK, until you lie to them. IMO, if they really are conserned with safety, they would make their "safety checkpoint" the BMV. If your vehicle doesn't pass, you don't get a license plate. The fact that they don't do this, and instead choose to stop innocent people under the guise of ''safety'' is the issue. Not only were the OP's rights broken, he probably was lied to as well. I don't know about you, but I don't trust liars. Why should I be expected to make an exception for some one just because they carry a badge? I too know some LEOs. A couple turned out to be filthy, but, they got by because they carry that badge, and up until recently, were always extended ''professional coutesy'' by other officers that had them red handed. One got caught after 15 years, and the other 23 years of ''service''. We've all heard and read about LEOs gone bad. So, for me, it makes it a little harder to just respect the badge when you know you are being lied to, and your rights are being trampled.

To the OP, I do hope you can make a case, and the MCLU, and maybe the NRA, has deep enough pockets to get justice.

 

[LippCJ7]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

Guys if your serious about your Gun rights please look into the Gun Owners of America, they are a no comprimise organization, much more aggressive lobbying for your rights.

I Fish, man that sucks you have no rights in your vehicle at all.

LadyFish, God bless you for having the courage to express your opinion, Please don't take offense to anything said here, its a passionate debate on both sides, but I feel you are closer to the fence then anyone may think, I bet with a little conversation we can convert you to the dark side!!

The Worlds largest Army is the United States Gun Owner numbering more then an estimated 70 million Gun Owners with over 100 Million Guns, it is thought that there are more gun owners in the United States then there are Military Personnel in all the countries of the world COMBINED.

 

[SparkieBoat]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

I got to thinking about this thing, and man, I guess a lot of other people have too! In Ohio, when you get your license plate or registration, and, if you read the fine print of the document you have to sign and agree to, you are giving up any right to refuse a search of your vehicle. Ohio considers a license plate a privilege, not a right. So, if this had happened in Ohio, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Funny thing is, I don't know anybody, besides myself, that has taken the time to read all of it. The ladies behind the desk at the BMV, and the people in line behind you, get pretty agitated when you hold up the line trying to figure out what you are really signing. And, conveniently enough, the document you leave with makes no mention of what you just agreed to or the document you just had to sign.

Second, I think the main reason the OP, and everyone on their side, is really mad at the fact that the police can, will, and do, lie to you and me. Of course, it's all OK, until you lie to them. IMO, if they really are conserned with safety, they would make their "safety checkpoint" the BMV. If your vehicle doesn't pass, you don't get a license plate. The fact that they don't do this, and instead choose to stop innocent people under the guise of ''safety'' is the issue. Not only were the OP's rights broken, he probably was lied to as well. I don't know about you, but I don't trust liars. Why should I be expected to make an exception for some one just because they carry a badge? I too know some LEOs. A couple turned out to be filthy, but, they got by because they carry that badge, and up until recently, were always extended ''professional coutesy'' by other officers that had them red handed. One got caught after 15 years, and the other 23 years of ''service''. We've all heard and read about LEOs gone bad. So, for me, it makes it a little harder to just respect the badge when you know you are being lied to, and your rights are being trampled.

To the OP, I do hope you can make a case, and the MCLU, and maybe the NRA, has deep enough pockets to get justice.

Glad I do not live in OH..must suck to live in a state where cops can stop you, detain you and or your family as long as they want to and go through your stuff with absolutely no probable cause..i got a feeling that that fine print would not hold up in court, but i have been wrong before..I think once anyway, hard to remember its been so long ago.

 

[lckstckn2smknbrls]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

www.opencarry.org is good reading if you want to learn what your rights are when stopped by the police.

 

[tx1961whaler]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

Glad I do not live in OH..must suck to live in a state where cops can stop you, detain you and or your family as long as they want to and go through your stuff with absolutely no probable cause..i got a feeling that that fine print would not hold up in court, but i have been wrong before..I think once anyway, hard to remember its been so long ago.

Here is the Ohio car registration form: http://publicsafety.ohio.gov/links/bmv5736.pdf. Nothing in there about having to consent to anything but providing a proof of insurance.

 

[LippCJ7]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

Not to disagree with you tx1961whaler but I looked on several forums about the concerns voiced here on Wisconsin and Ohio and believe it or not they are pretty accurate from the Forums I belong to. Hard to believe but it makes me pretty thankful for the freedom I enjoy where I live, Still find it hard to believe people will stand for it.

 

[mcgyver210]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

I find this very interesting as I am a law enforcement officer here in Canada....but I always say there are 2 sides to every story and I would like to hear the other side.
I do have a question though....why do you carry a handgun in your vehicle? Is it that dangerous where you live? or is it simply because you can ?

Not sure about Bubba but I can tell you I almost always have one of my guns in arms reach even in my house. I avoid businesses that post anti gun signs also & prefer to give non posted businesses my business.

I like the wording cops use. "can I" or "you don't mind if I search your vehicle?" my answer is no. and when the cop asks why i tell him because if he had a legal reason to search my vehicle, he wouldn't need my permission. cops carry recorders on their person, so if you file a complaint, be perfectly honest. the cop will let his supervisor listen to the recording for his defense and try to make you out to be a liar.

Funny how it is OK for a LEO to outright LIE to you & record you without your consent or knowledge but when you do it to them they cry foul. We I have a better camera setup & recorder on my company trucks than they have in their patrol cars. I also carry at all times just in case a couple of voice recorders one auto uploads to server so can't be destroyed. Evidence is a two way street as long as you have your recordings of them also.

They shouldn't have a problem with us recording them as they do us if they have nothing to hide, sound familiar?





You should never volunteer to let a LEO search without a warrant or probable cause because in this case they are definitely not your friend.

 

[oops!]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

lol.....just saw this bubba (my internet at home is down, it will take a while before they can get there to fix it).......

but all i got to say is...........guess you should have hired that guy eh?....

 

[tx1961whaler]

Re: "My" run in with the law.

Not to disagree with you tx1961whaler but I looked on several forums about the concerns voiced here on Wisconsin and Ohio and believe it or not they are pretty accurate from the Forums I belong to. Hard to believe but it makes me pretty thankful for the freedom I enjoy where I live, Still find it hard to believe people will stand for it.

Not disagreeing with you, just saying it's not on the registration forms that I saw. There may be other forms that may be signed and practices in place, but this was the mail in form on the DMV site. Getting the truth from forums is sometimes hard without actual data and authoritative proof being provided. Since most search and seizure laws and practice are based on Supreme Court rulings, the states have little leeway for interpretation. Here's some specific interpretation from Ohio:

An inventory search of a compartment of a lawfully impounded vehicle does not contravene the federal or state constitutions, where the search is administered in GOOD FAITH and in accordance with reasonable police procedures or established routine (see State v. Mesa, 87 Ohio St.3d 105, 717 N.E.2d 329 (Ohio 1999); U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 4; Const. Art. 1, ? 14).

The background details: Mr. Mesa had a warrant out for his arrest. Mr. Mesa was arrested while driving his car. Prior to towing the car, the car was searched and a concealed handgun was found. He then had a concealed weapons charged tacked on to the list of the other charges that he was wanted for on the original warrant. After much dickering (my editorial comment) the court found that Mr. Mesa did not have his 4th amendment or state rights violated by the search.
http://www.romingerlegal.com/Ohio_case_law/1999/1999-ohio-253.html
.