|
|
|
|
|
||
| Moderated by: jpierce | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
smn Regular Member
|
Let me preface this by adding I was OC'in at Monkey Joe's in Warner Robins (HWY 41 and 96) for about 15 minutes and switched to CC with my Crossbreed Supertuck. I felt watched. Lesson 1: Use a little discretion (perhaps), and Lesson 2: Keep a voice recorder  For those of you who may not know, Monkey Joe's is a private business. You bring your kids, pay to enter, get a wristband for each in the group, and watch the kids run and play. Someone (or multiples) notified police about me having a weapon while relaxing and watching my kids play. I'm comfortably reclined in a chair. At approximately 1930h two officers (M and H) approach and M asks about a weapon and if I had a conceal carry permit. I answer to them that I have a Georgia Firearms License. They ask me the location of the weapon and politely remind me not to reach for it. They want to disarm me and 'code 5' the weapon. I lean away from my weapon and M disarms me, clears the weapon and hands it to H. They ask me to stand and step outside. I ask AIFTG. We go around two or three AIFTG and "am I being detained" Q&A sessions. AIFTG? No. Am I being detained? No. Without having a voice recorder I play along. I stood up and we walked out. Officer H goes to his vehicle to run the numbers. Outside the business Officer M asks me for my GFL and DL. Without my voice recorder I comply and hand over both my GFL and DL. I'm not patted down. Officer M understands about carrying a weapon as he admits he does the same when he's not on duty. He has no issue with me carrying to protect myself, family or those around me. His concern was people called about someone having a gun in Monkey Joe's. He spoke conveniently about officer safety when referring to disarming me a minute or two later. We chit chat a little about Florida v. JL and GCO to which the officer shows no interest. Officer H returns with the weapon. At this time M informs me "not to carry" in the establishment. I asked if an agent of the management told him that. He said no. I asked "Under the color of law you're telling me not to carry in there?" He replies with the "public gathering." "Public gathering?" I ask. Officer H replies with "Public gathering. My supervisor says so." At this time they ask about my vehicle that they'd like to store the weapon in there until I leave the establishment. We walk to my vehicle and I unlock the passenger side door and open the glove box and H puts in my weapon and M puts in the magazine. Without my voice recorder I politely thank them, shaking their hands and addressing each as officer M and officer H, respectively. WRPD was cool about it. I'm upset that I didn't have my voice recorder. Open records request is my next step. Thoughts? |
|||||||||
|
Fallschirmjäger Regular Member
|
One's rights shouldn't be dependent on whether or not one has a means of recording an interaction, but I can see, understand, and even support your actions. I've always had an evil side; I probably would have let the officer carrying my firearm on a very roundabout tour of the public parking spaces looking for my red car. Sorry, that was before I got the new one, it's blue...................................I think. Honey, what car did we drive tonight? I certainly can't fault the Officers for not wishing to answer your "Am I free to go?" question. Nothing puts a crimp on a nice infringement on a citizen's rights like admitting you have no RAS, and are performing an illegal search (running the serial number of your weapon). I can only hope that perhaps you have their business cards and full names/identification? Definitely file a Georgia Open Record's Act to request all relevant communications in the matter. If nothing else, the cost to you is minimal and it will cause work and perhaps even comment in the department. Who knows, it may be enough of a pain in the butt that a lesson may be learned about RAS and lack therof. I've made a conscious decision to carry as 'sterile' as I can. I only have the one car, so my driver's license stays in that car 24/7 unless I have a need to operate another vehicle. My GFL is carried in a small business card wallet along with my bank card and "identification". I use a Passport Card, legal in all 57 States, Canada and Mexico.  Last edited on Sun Apr 26th, 2009 08:20 am by Fallschirmjäger |
|||||||||
|
jerg_064 Regular Member
|
smn wrote: Let me preface this by adding I was OC'in at Monkey Joe's in Warner Robins (HWY 41 and 96) for about 15 minutes and switched to CC with my Crossbreed Supertuck. I felt watched. Isn't Monkey joes at Russel parkway and HWY 41, or is there two of them. I live just down the street off of lakeview. jerg_064 wrote: I called both the Warner robins police department, and the Houston county Sheriff's department. Both are in agreement, and know the interpretation of 16-11-130(not that it could be interpreted in any other manner than what it clearly states). They still suggested to get a GFL to avoid confrontations with rookies and ignorant officers, but said if I have problems to ask to speak to their supervisor. This is on the outskirts of Robins AFB so most know the Ga Code pertaining to military i was informed. Though this pertains to a different subject, next time I would ask to have a supervisor come out before I gave up my 4th amendment rights. Sgt. Clifton seemed like a good guy over the phone, and I later came to find out that he is an in-law of a good friend. Friend says he's a good guy. |
|||||||||
|
exgabrit Regular Member 
|
i think i would have pointed out that a public gathering is a meeting of people of like minds, i.e. gathering for the same purpose. a resturant is not a public gathering. it's amazing how little some LEO's know, such as GFL v CCW :-/ |
|||||||||
|
exgabrit Regular Member
|
another thing. or few things. 1) can an officer ask to see a DL even when not in control of an automobile ? (i've heard that you can decline), 2) what is code-5 of the weapon (i again assume that it's securing the weapon), can the office legally run the numbers without probable cause ? 3) if you are clear of no-wrong doing, are you therefore not entitled to put your sidearm back in its holster and go about your business ? i think i may acquire a recording device of suitable capacity for 'just in case'. obviously we don't want to undully agrevate the officers, but if we have certain rights, then we should excerise those rights. such as not agreeing to showing DL's when not driving a car. |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
I realized the officer was uninformed of the law when he asked about a ccw. I'm kicking myself for not having my voice recorder on me at the time. An open records request is in the mail. |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
smn wrote: I realized the officer was uninformed of the law when he asked about a ccw. I'm kicking myself for not having my voice recorder on me at the time. You should make a formal complaint re taking your gun and running serial numbers - what reasonable suspicion was there of any crime or possession of astolen gun? none it appears - so SN check violates the Fourth Amendment, see Arizona v. Hicks. |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
Agreed. Thanks for the case cite. I was trying to remember it this morning on the way to work. There is much to cite in case law. |
|||||||||
|
smoking357 Banned 
|
smn wrote: Thoughts? They are bad cops who walked all over your rights. It would be nice to get the name of the snitch and bring some lawsuit action against it. Fire up those requests. |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
The name(s) of the snitch(es) is unimportant, unless it was an employee of the business. We can continue to quarterback this all we want, but this isn't football. It's more like chess. I do appreciate the support. When one of us stands up for his/her rights, we stand up for everyone else's rights, too, sheep or sheepdog. Last edited on Mon Apr 27th, 2009 02:25 pm by smn |
|||||||||
|
smoking357 Banned
|
smn wrote: The name(s) of the snitch(es) is unimportant, I disagree. When people get sued for calling the cops on others, they'll learn to keep their mouths shut. People need to mind their business. |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
Under what basis would you make your claim against the caller(s)? Sure it was none of their business, but they didn't know that. For all they knew the call was "for the children." My children were there too. Sure the encounter was a nuisance to me but this is a training issue for the responding officers, if not the department. Much of the inadequate training is under discussion at GeorgiaPacking.org. In my mind, any lawsuit against the caller on my part is unjustified and could be deemed as harassment and retribution. I can and will write a complaint to the department and request the training meet constitutional muster. I can also go before the county commissioners and state my complaints there. Further complaints go before the courts. Last edited on Mon Apr 27th, 2009 03:28 pm by smn |
|||||||||
|
smoking357 Banned
|
smn wrote: Under what basis would you make your claim against the caller(s)? Sure it was none of their business, but they didn't know that. For all they knew the call was "for the children." My children were there too. You need a colorable argument of law. If the tape merely says "he's carrying a gun," then the fault is entirely with the cops. If the snitch adds other comments, those comments can for the basis for a false arrest lawsuit or a defamation lawsuit, as imputation of criminal conduct is per se defamatory. They took your gun from you, spoke to you without your permission, detained you, humiliated you, dragged you outside, and did this publicly to dissaude others from exercising their civil rights. Yeah, I'd say "retribution? is exactly what's needed. |
|||||||||
|
SlackwareRobert Regular Member
|
Do those passport cards have a spy chip in them? If so how many watts needed to fix the problem? What car, I rode the bus? But when stated he didn't have any authority to tresspass, you should have said that they can return your property inside where they took it from you. The public watching a citizen being handed back his property taken by force would be a great reminder that we are all equal under the law. But for the police to let the caller get away with stopping you, they are embolding them to do it again. Better to set them straight by a puplic returning of gun in same maner it was taken. |
|||||||||
|
Fallschirmjäger Regular Member
|
Don't know if there is any RFID chip in the Passport Card, never really thought about it. Any information on the chip would likely not be useful to the average law enforcement officer not carrying the proper chip reader, and I doubt many carry that while on patrol.... But when stated he didn't have any authority to tresspass, you should have said that they can return your property inside where they took it from you... Ohhh, I like that! Should the occasion ever arise, I hope to use that very idea. Last edited on Mon Apr 27th, 2009 08:07 pm by Fallschirmjäger |
|||||||||
|
exgabrit Regular Member
|
But doesn't Arizona v Hicks apply to additional searching unrelated to the original call. In the case of being called to a MWAG call, the initial purpose of being there is the firearm, therefore the serial number check isn't a secondary search ? Any further insight would be great, I may print the brief and keep it in the car. Mike wrote: smn wrote:I realized the officer was uninformed of the law when he asked about a ccw. I'm kicking myself for not having my voice recorder on me at the time. |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
An open records request has been sent. I've prepared a complaint but will wait until the records request is fulfilled. |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
Part of my ORR has been received. Any available audio will come from the Houston County 911 center. I did receive two recordings involving a Sgt taking one call requesting him to return a call Monkey Joe's. Two interesting notes: * The Sgt spoke of a concealed carry permit only and did not mention the PG assertion I was given, and * Internal department training materials or memorandums for responding to a phone in "man with a gun" call - A search was made, but no such internal training documents or memorandums were located reference responding to a phone in "man with gun" call. So, on the face of it, the department doesn't refer to the GFL correctly, and there may not be any suitable information available to the responding officers for someone lawfully carrying a weapon. Interesting. Now to query the Houston Co. 911 Center. |
|||||||||
|
codename_47 Regular Member
|
I don't see what you are complaining about. You were weak. They asked you to do something and you did it. There is nothing wrong with that. You didn't force any confrontation. There was no 4th amendment violation, IMHO. |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
Perhaps I found my inner sheep. But from the onset I believed I was being detained because the officers gave conflicting answers when I asked if I was free to go or if I was being detained. Next time I'll be more prepared. |
|||||||||
|
Jonesy Regular Member
|
smn wrote: Perhaps I found my inner sheep. But from the onset I believed I was being detained because the officers gave conflicting answers when I asked if I was free to go or if I was being detained. A few thoughts. Have the voice recorder, which you already know. Continue to ask if you are being detained. If they say no, say ok then I am leaving, and begin to walk away. If they want to detain you, get it plain as day. Then you will have them for an illegal seizure of your person, no RAS or probable cause (assuming the caller didn't say you were doing anything illegal). When they go for the weapon, verbally object by stating you do not consent to any searches, but do not physically resist. If you are carrying in a holster, request that if the weapon is removed from your person, that it stay in the holster. State again that you do not consent to any searches. Object to them running the serial number, and state it is your gun, but you object to them searching it for the serial numbers. In most states, you have no obligation to show ID, although some states have a statute requiring you to show when requested by an officer (unsure re Georgia). In Virginia, the proper procedure is to tell them your name, but object to showing ID. I would object to show ID, and if ordered to I would comply but state that I believe the officer is improperly requiring me to do so. Hope this helps. |
|||||||||
|
codename_47 Regular Member
|
Continue to ask if you are being detained. I disagree. The detainment, absent any changing circumstances is a one time thing. Yes, you walk. No, you forget how to speak english. I would object to show ID, and if ordered to I would comply but state that I believe the officer is improperly requiring me to do so. I so hate this "the cop ordered me to do it" stuff. You are not in the military, and neither are they. They have ZERO authority to march you around or tell you to do stuff in a general sense. Sure, they can tell you to put your hands up and all, but this demanding information and ID is for the birds. You do not show him. If you do, then he merely requested it, and you gave it to him in a consensual encounter, you will probably lose in a 4th amendment challenge. Do not show him any ID unless required by law, period. This is right up there with talking to the police in any capacity. Just don't do it! Last edited on Sat May 9th, 2009 03:18 pm by codename_47 |
|||||||||
|
Jonesy Regular Member
|
codename_47 wrote: Continue to ask if you are being detained. If you want to refuse an order of a police officer given under color of authority, go ahead, me, I will simply assert my rights and comply with orders, and record with my voice recorder any unlawful conduct. Showing ID after initially refusing and then stating you are doing so despite knowing it is improper does not magically convert it into being consensual. I have been in this situation, and refused to show ID 4 times when asked by an officer, and never showed him. By order I do not mean the cop saying show me some ID. I mean the cop saying show me ID or we are going to arrest you. In many states like Virginia where I live, a citizen is entitled to resist an unlawful arrest. But you better be damn sure the arrest is unlawful before doing so. I will never physically resist unless I am in grave danger, nor will I resist direct orders, although I will verbally object. Last edited on Sun May 10th, 2009 06:35 am by Jonesy |
|||||||||
|
old dog Regular Member
|
Resist physically and you've given Officer Mongo an excuse to brain you -- or worse. After all, he once scored four touchdowns in a single game. Seriously, can police demand a driver's license unless you are stopped in a vehicle? |
|||||||||
|
codename_47 Regular Member
|
Seriously, can police demand a driver's license unless you are stopped in a vehicle? Sure, they can demand you hop on one leg and pat your head too. Some people may do it, while I would refuse. In both of these cases, there is no legal requirement to do it, they are requesting you do it, and you are complying consensually. Furthermore, there is no legal requirement to have a driver's license, at all. Some people don't have them. The Amish spring to mind, but there are also people who live in NYC where there is ample public transportation and you just don't need one. Besides, what are they going to do? Arrest you for not having a license? Showing ID after initially refusing and then stating you are doing so despite knowing it is improper does not magically convert it into being consensual. That is what their report will say and that is what will be said in court, assuming it gets that far. I'd rather be arrested for not showing him ID and beat them down in a civil suit vs giving them a potential defense. |
|||||||||
|
Jonesy Regular Member
|
codename_47 wrote: Seriously, can police demand a driver's license unless you are stopped in a vehicle? If their reports contains such lies they will have a tough time when we play my voice recording to the prosecutor. They may then be facing charges. |
|||||||||
|
Jonesy Regular Member
|
Check out this thread, it should give you some ideas. http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/25728.html |
|||||||||
|
rpyne Regular Member
|
Fallschirmjäger wrote: Don't know if there is any RFID chip in the Passport Card, never really thought about it. Yes, passport cards do have RFID chips. Didn't you read the information that came with the card? They even come with a shielded pouch to keep it in to prevent it from being read. Any information on the chip would likely not be useful to the average law enforcement officer not carrying the proper chip reader, and I doubt many carry that while on patrol. It may surprise you what can be done with the information on the RFID chip in your passport card, not the least of which is it can be used to forge passports. |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
My complaint concerning the incident should be in the chief's hands today. |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
I received a letter today from Chief Brett Evans recognizing my complaint "as more of a policy or training failure than a malicious disregard" of my rights. My incident and letter is under review by their attorneys and upper division staff. Chief Evans will contact me again in 30 days. I'm pleased upon receiving this response. Chief Evans corrects the differences in context between my incident and that of in Florida v. JL, in that the call was not anonymous. I will follow up by referring to US v. Dudley; although Dudley is not Supreme Court precedent, it does state that you can't get RAS from a phone call. |
|||||||||
|
rmodel65 Regular Member 
|
arent all phone calls anonymous?? |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
The responding officers did meet with the complainant(s) for a couple of minutes before approaching me. That time is a good indicator of my lawful behavior. |
|||||||||
|
thejax Regular Member 
|
If they hav e a record of who the complainant(s) are, I would find where they live and show up, unarmed ofcourse, and speak to them nicely, not accuse them of anything, and educate them. Who knows, they may do it to someone else because they are ignorant of the law. They may feel stupid and apologize. |
|||||||||
|
smn Regular Member
|
I found out who the complainant was in an open records request. I then called the person (who was the manager of the day at Monkey Joe's) and spoke with her. It was very civil. Calling the police wasn't a big concern of mine, but when the responding officers weren't up to date with current law then that's a problem. It's also time to write the chief for an update on his Administrative review. |
|||||||||