based on the story and video, seemed like RS to me.
RS = Rabbit Stuff????
based on the story and video, seemed like RS to me.
RS of an actual crime? Which one?
The officer sure couldn't articulate anything resembling suspicion of a crime, let alone a reasonable one.
Destro, can I borrow your rose-colored glasses sometime?
Handcuffed for an extended period of time is not just being detained. So, if anyone makes a phone call about anyone is RS for any kind of stop.
He did not just happen upon the guy, he was sent to investigate a citizens concern of a suspicious person, who happened to be carrying a gun. He observed the individual whom was reported to police as suspicious. The officer performed a stop and question on the individual based on these facts. He was detained (not free to leave) while an investigation was performed based on the facts and circumstances. It was determined that no crime was committed and the individual was free to leave. The officer was not driving around looking for somebody to hit with his jackboots, he was sent their based on the report of a citizens concern of suspicious activity.
So, you've got absolutely nothing which would rise to RS of any crime and nothing to refute the officer's own admission of why he actually detained at gunpoint, cuffed and disarmed the man "...because you've got a handgun, walkin' down the street."
I'm sure the report will grasp for something reasonably suspicious just as you have, but there was simply no excuse. They should have sent a better informed officer who knows the law and the limits of his authority. I'm sure most would have driven on by finding nothing suspicious to investigate.
Should be an easy payday.
He did not just happen upon the guy, he was sent to investigate a citizens concern of a suspicious person, who happened to be carrying a gun. He observed the individual whom was reported to police as suspicious. The officer performed a stop and question on the individual based on these facts. He was detained (not free to leave) while an investigation was performed based on the facts and circumstances. It was determined that no crime was committed and the individual was free to leave. The officer was not driving around looking for somebody to hit with his jackboots, he was sent their based on the report of a citizens concern of suspicious activity.
...And the police wonder why the common citizen hates their guts so much...
The common citizen should refrain from painting with the broad brush. There's no excuse for that, either.
Overlooked in the confrontation is the fact that when the officer drew his weapon, there was a dark SUV that drove between himself and the alleged perpetrator? What is up with that? What happened to the concept of muzzle control around innocent bystanders? If I were the person in that SUV, I'd be just as pissed as the guy who was being detained for public safety (of course)....
You just dont have a clue do you? Walking down the street is NOT suspicious activity with or without a gun. The person was under NO OBLIGATION to offer any personally identifiable information as a crime was NOT being committed, or had been committed. Why dont you go back over to O.com and hang around with the rest of the jackboots who love to Unconstitutionally detain people, and then get the taxpayers on the hook for multi-thousand dollar lawsuits. And the police wonder why the common citizen hates their guts so much. The police are NOT your friend, the police are NOT there to help you, the police are there to do ONE job, and that is to ARREST a criminal, that is all, NOTHING more.
Gunner
A crime need not be committed for law enforcement toconduct an investigative stop.
that didn't look very investigative to me.
A crime need not be committed for law enforcement toconduct an investigative stop.
Am I free to go, am I being legally detained, are you investigating me for committing a crime?
Gunner
This was an extreme terry stop.