+1 to fishers pd

[revance]

Nice try Joe, your the one turning the mole hill into a mountain here. I've put my life on the line to defend our constitution so in no way am I desecrating it. If the LEO had a good reason to pull him over then no one was breaking the law, if he wasn't cuffed and put in a cruiser, he wasn't illegally detained and lastly, I would hazard to guess (whether they were just being polite or not) they probably asked if they could run the gun.

THAT is the problem, there was no good reason to pull him over. If he DID something to get pulled over I wouldn't have a problem.

I also have no problems if they want to politely ask what his business was there... but after he answers with "I work here" THEIR POLICE BUSINESS IS OVER!

If they don't believe him they can go back to their car and observe him.

 

[Booya]

Wow, I'm not even going to quote all those, my bad I had the fact wrong. Seriously, my bad. At least it was happening in an area where they were supposedly some recent burglaries. I'll concede all my arguments, your all right!!

HOLY SMOKES EVERYONE, the police inconvenienced an innocent man for 10 whole minutes. They must be stopped this instant, let's start burning crosses in their yards and call a town meeting! As a matter of fact, I'm going to flip off every cop I see from now on. I mean seriously, AN INNOCENT MAN! FOR 10 WHOLE MINUTES! I mean where do we live? Someone has to stop these Gestapo! On street raping will be next, watch and see!

Whatever, I'm done with this argument. I'd be right there with you guys if he was all cuffed and his weapons confiscated and well....If anything actually bad happened.

 

[Joe Williams]

Nice try Joe, your the one turning the mole hill into a mountain here. I've put my life on the line to defend our constitution so in no way am I desecrating it. If the LEO had a good reason to pull him over then no one was breaking the law, if he wasn't cuffed and put in a cruiser, he wasn't illegally detained and lastly, I would hazard to guess (whether they were just being polite or not) they probably asked if they could run the gun.
snip!

1) I've also put my life on the line for the Constitution. That's why I'm so unwilling to see it tossed it aside so cavalierly by those unwilling to defend the document every day, whether out of fear or disrespect for the document.

2) You clearly are utterly ignorant of what being detained is. If you cannot comprehend basic aspects of the law, you should educate yourself. Further, since you have no idea what being "detained" is, you obviously lack the knowledge to comment on whether the detention was legal or illegal.

3) You can "hazard" whatever guesses you wish. You haven't done well with facts, so far, so your guesses can't be any worse.

 

[Prometheus]

Yes it would still be OK, it would then be a D#@#d boss thread. There are casualties in a war. War on crime = a few innocent people get inconvenienced every now and then.

On CRIME.

In this case there was NO CRIME! WTH is wrong with you? you act as if a founding father stole your wife or something.

There shouldn't even be a LTCH, we need constitutional carry.

The was no reasonable suspicion and these officers blatantly violated the OP's rights.

Maybe you'll get hit by a snow plow this winter, after all in the war on snow, a few innocents may occasionally catch the blade.

 

[revance]

HOLY SMOKES EVERYONE, the police inconvenienced an innocent man for 10 whole minutes.

They stopped someone who had done NOTHING WRONG. I could forgive that had they just asked what he was doing and left it alone... but they didn't. They went on to ask about weapons in an attempt to catch him on illegal weapons possession.

I don't like that they tried to catch a random person who had done NOTHING WRONG on a weapons charge. Lets be serious here, they didn't ask about it for their safety because at that point their police business was over... they asked in an attempt to catch him on a weapons charge.

Again I ask you... are you alright if an officer stood on the sidewalk downtown and asked everyone who passed by if they had weapons? This is no different.

 

[Booya]

On CRIME.

In this case there was NO CRIME! WTH is wrong with you? you act as if a founding father stole your wife or something.

There shouldn't even be a LTCH, we need constitutional carry.

The was no reasonable suspicion and these officers blatantly violated the OP's rights.

Maybe you'll get hit by a snow plow this winter, after all in the war on snow, a few innocents may occasionally catch the blade.

I don't understand your first comment about founding fathers and my wife?
Second comment - I totally agree
Third comment - only the police know that.
Your right maybe I will get hit by a plow - so maybe there shouldn't be any plows out anymore in the winter - lets let the street fill with snow that way no one ever gets hit or inconvenienced by them. <good point.

 

[revance]

If an officer approached you after you parked your car at work, told you there had been a rash of break-ins, and asked if he could search your car... would you let him?

This is no different.

 

[PatriotPride]

Come on guys. Let's be civil. Look at it this way:

Some people actually like and CONDONE being bent over by the long arm of the law and butt-probed, so to speak, for no good reason.

Others, like myself, are getting tired of many cops jamming their heads up my butt "because they can", even when they're in blatant violation of the law.

 

[PatriotPride]

If an officer approached you after you parked your car at work, told you there had been a rash of break-ins, and asked if he could search your car... would you let him?

This is no different.

Hell to the no, I refuse, no, no, no, hell no, emphatically, positively, absolutely, hell no.

 

[Booya]

If an officer approached you after you parked your car at work, told you there had been a rash of break-ins, and asked if he could search your car... would you let him?

This is no different.

But he didn't ask to search his car (in the original post). Everyone wants to what if these stories to DEATH.

Your right though. I would say no, but if he asked if I had a weapon, I would say yes. if he asked/told me he was going to run it, I'd be OK with that also. I'm comforted each time I'm pulled over or approached by the police in knowing that, I have done nothing wrong. I'm not a criminal.

Look, the fact of the matter here is just as Joe said earlier. You DO have to break a few eggs occasionally in the name of safety. The police exist (for the most part) to protect and serve. Maybe I take it personally when I know that some of my best friends (whom are police officers) would take a bullet for every stranger reading this, and still people want to sh*t on them for being human. Innocent people are going to get pulled over, and you know what, I doubt that every one of them is going to be innocent, and some bad people will go to jail - for having done nothing wrong. I AM ok with that.

 

[Joe Williams]

snip

Look, the fact of the matter here is just as Joe said earlier. You DO have to break a few eggs occasionally in the name of safety.

And there you have it.

Some of us value and revere freedom and our Constitution.

And then... there are those that do not.

 

[PatriotPride]

And there you have it.

Some of us value and revere freedom and our Constitution.

And then... there are those that do not.

We certainly do have our fair share of oblivious anti-Constitution persons on here don't we. It's sad when you see people condoning breaking the law because it makes them feel all special inside.

 

[revance]

But he didn't ask to search his car (in the original post). Everyone wants to what if these stories to DEATH.

You are right, he didn't. Had he asked that, you could have REFUSED. However asking if you have weapons, YOU MUST ANSWER. After answering, he abused INSC rulings allowing LEOs to temporarily confiscate weapons during their duties. Why was it abused? Because his duties were DONE! His question about weapons was completely irrelevant to the situation because his duties were DONE.

If you want to ask what business someone has being somewhere because there has been a lot of crimes... fine. But when the person (who has done nothing wrong) answers that they work there... YOU ARE DONE!

 

[sj kahr k40]

But he didn't ask to search his car (in the original post). Everyone wants to what if these stories to DEATH.

Your right though. I would say no, but if he asked if I had a weapon, I would say yes. if he asked/told me he was going to run it, I'd be OK with that also. I'm comforted each time I'm pulled over or approached by the police in knowing that, I have done nothing wrong. I'm not a criminal.

Look, the fact of the matter here is just as Joe said earlier. You DO have to break a few eggs occasionally in the name of safety. The police exist (for the most part) to protect and serve. Maybe I take it personally when I know that some of my best friends (whom are police officers) would take a bullet for every stranger reading this, and still people want to sh*t on them for being human. Innocent people are going to get pulled over, and you know what, I doubt that every one of them is going to be innocent, and some bad people will go to jail - for having done nothing wrong. I AM ok with that.

And if you somehow have a gun that was reported stolen

You would have no problem going to jail, spending money on a lawyer, going to prison, and losing you rights to own guns?

After all you got to break a few eggs to make an omlet.

Don't think it can happen. Read this thread.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-nj_imprisons_gunowner_who_broke_no_laws.html

 

[sj kahr k40]

You are right, he didn't. Had he asked that, you could have REFUSED. However asking if you have weapons, YOU MUST ANSWER. After answering, he abused INSC rulings allowing LEOs to temporarily confiscate weapons during their duties. Why was it abused? Because his duties were DONE! His question about weapons was completely irrelevant to the situation because his duties were DONE.

If you want to ask what business someone has being somewhere because there has been a lot of crimes... fine. But when the person (who has done nothing wrong) answers that they work there... YOU ARE DONE!

Actually you don't have to answer, you can just sit there, I would advise against lying to the officer.

 

[PatriotPride]

Actually you don't have to answer, you can just sit there, I would advise against lying to the officer.

Beat me to it. You don't ever have to tell a police officer jack-s***. Plain and simple. If they ask if you have weapons, you are not obligated to say a single word. Plead the 5th all day and all night if you wish. Seldom will they have probable cause to determine if you have weapons anyway.
They can't just search your vehicle if/when you refuse to answer. If they try, lock that biznatch up tight.

 

[revance]

Actually you don't have to answer, you can just sit there, I would advise against lying to the officer.

I was under the impression that you were required to answer if an officer asked you a lawful question or they could take you into custody.

 

[PatriotPride]

I was under the impression that you were required to answer if an officer asked you a lawful question or they could take you into custody.

Nope. They can take you into custody all they want without PC, and that's a sad truth. They've already detained you by the time they are questioning you, and they better have a damned good reason as to why they're putting the shiny bracelets on.

I think you may be confused with Michigan law---you are required to advise an officer if stopped that you are carrying a firearm, but no such law exists here.

The 5th was written to protect us from those who would abuse the law, plain and simple. You are WELL within your rights to refuse to be questioned. It's no different with police---play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Be courteous to me, and it'll go a long way. Play 20 questions and try to engage in an illegal search and see where that gets you.

 

[sj kahr k40]

I was under the impression that you were required to answer if an officer asked you a lawful question or they could take you into custody.

Nope don't have to talk to cops, if they start out being polite I'm polite back, be an ass and I'm an ass, I used the phrase, and how is that relevant to why you stopped me a few times, they don't like it one bit.

I was told many, many times to not volunteer info to cops by a prosecutor and his friends who happened to be cops.

 

[Joe Williams]

I was under the impression that you were required to answer if an officer asked you a lawful question or they could take you into custody.

Nope. You are required to identify yourself (name, DOB, address) and nothing else.

If the officer insists on going further, and you do not wish to answer his/her questions, you can (and should) simply ask if you are being detained. If so, why are you being detained? And state that you are not willing to answer any further questions without a lawyer, that you do not consent to a search of your person or property, and that you do not waive any rights. By doing so, you have actively asserted your rights, and if the officer chooses to proceed, you will have firm grounds for a lawsuit if he/she cannot lay out firm reasonable articulable suspicion that a crime had been or was about to be committed, and that you were the person who committed or was about to commit a crime.

"Looking suspicious" is not RAS.