The CCW holder (legally required to notify) notifies him that he is carrying a concealed weapon. Well, attempts to, anyway...|||Wow. That officer's conduct is simply unacceptable and gives all other cops a bad name. More fuel for the fire of those anarchist idiots who like calling cops pigs. IMO, he needs to at least be put on unpaid leave for a while. He and the other officer should also probably be forced to take a review class on police procedure, as it looks to me (not a cop, fyi) like there might have been several technical errors that could have ended quite badly.
Judging by his language and choice of words, it also seemed to me like he's got some strong anti-second amendment feelings that came out during the arrest.
Its a pretty clear cut case of abuse of power, IMO.
As for the law requiring CCW holders to notify the police officers, I can see some serious problems with it. For starters, I thought that the CCW license database was linked with the vehicle registry so that it comes up when they run the plates. Then they can just ask right away if the guy is currently armed or not. Is that not the case?
EDIT: Looks like the officer in question was indeed placed on leave. In fact, he's been the target of 16 previous internal affairs investigations since 2000. Maybe its time to stop considering suspension and start considering firing and, possibly, some jail time.|||Quote:
He and the other officer should also probably be forced to take a review class on police procedure, as it looks to me (not a cop, fyi) like there might have been several technical errors that could have ended quite badly.
This is correct. IF that guy wanted to smoke these officers, it would have been cake. There were a lot of mistakes made.
Quote:
As for the law requiring CCW holders to notify the police officers, I can see some serious problems with it. For starters, I thought that the CCW license database was linked with the vehicle registry so that it comes up when they run the plates. Then they can just ask right away if the guy is currently armed or not. Is that not the case?
This is correct. In the video you can hear dispatch telling them this information. Why they didn't know earlier is subject to speculation AFAIK, but the easiest answer is that they didn't run the plate until much later (where the dispatcher gives them this information). Another mistake.
Quote:
EDIT: Looks like the officer in question was indeed placed on leave. In fact, he's been the target of 16 previous internal affairs investigations since 2000. Maybe its time to stop considering suspension and start considering firing and, possibly, some jail time.
Paid leave.
If a citizen did this to a cop or another citizen in any situation - even after a legitimate defensive shooting, he'd be in jail before any trial. But the reality is that things are heavily skewed in an officer's favor. Note the history of this officer with respect to excessive force. Interesting, huh?|||This has been huge news here since I live 30 miles north of Canton.
I was shocked at the behavior of the officer when I heard it on the radio. It has also been said that the officer is an Iraqi war veteran and that may have contributed to his actions. If he is that unstable he does not need to be in that line of work.
I don't think he should be on paid leave.|||Quote:
Quote:
Leave
Paid leave.
Vacation.
But if anyone needs something to keep them from smashing their head against a wall in a murderous rage, try this one:
The cop is so polite, he makes the guy videotaping him look like a paranoid loon.|||Quote:
Vacation.
But if anyone needs something to keep them from smashing their head against a wall in a murderous rage, try this one:
The cop is so polite, he makes the guy videotaping him look like a paranoid loon.
It doesn't matter how polite they are if they are violating your rights or intend to throw the book at you even if you are following the law. I am not saying that's the case here, but one of our members, shall we say, has already learned this lesson the hard way. He was violating no law, the cops were smiling, polite, and talkative, but he, well, let's just say he's not a free man any more and his life is a bit upside down.
The OCer did what he was supposed to do, and because the officer was respectful and polite, Jeremy gave him more information than he HAD to. But believe me, getting to this point in CA was a hard fought battle over years with local PD's over what the LAW was, and it came from people like him getting guns pointed at them, jail stints, and otherwise hostile and aggressive behavior by local LEO's to "nail" OC'ers despite the complete legality of their actions. Remember, if law enforcement officers are not aware of the law or make a mistake in arresting you in most cases, qualified immunity protects them. If YOU are not aware of the law or make a mistake, you still get the book thrown at you.
Having personally been a part of the movement and seeing how badly officers have reacted to completely legal activity and their attempt to shutter it by scaring, threatening, or otherwise strong-arming law-abiding citizens and disabling recording devices (perfectly legal here) to hide their actions, it's very clear to me that Jeremy gave out more information than necessary, but maybe he felt like it because of the officer's behavior. That's at his discretion.
But the voice and video recorder, anonymity, and otherwise stonewalling are absolutely for Jeremy's protection. Members of the OC movement, after being ID'ed, have otherwise been followed or stopped in later incidents simply because the officers know the person OC'ed before. The fellow I mentioned earlier ID'ed himself to the officers and let them see his ID... which allowed them to arrest him later because of a malicious DA essentially arguing that private property is not private property if it is exposed to the public (a public place) even if it is privately owned... and winning.
At the end of the day, ANYTHING you say can and WILL be used against you in a court of law. Anything you do beyond legal requirements CAN expose you to increased liability. If you are being detained by an officer, it is more than likely because he has a reasonable, articulable, suspicion that you have, are, or will be committing a crime, and in this situation, you aren't doing yourself any favors by opening your mouth unnecessarily. The officer may change his mind after talking to you and then be cool - or he might not. Or he may play good cop and then bust you anyway.
And if it's your *** on the line, it is far better to be safe than sorry, and STFU. "Jeremy's" actions were born out by the jail time, threats, and other aggressive actions by LEO's against LEGAL activity and law-abiding citizens. So no, he's not a paranoid loon if you understand the situation on the ground or have first-hand experience with the situation here in CA. The situation is THAT bad in CA. Anyone carrying a gun without a badge (that is, LEO ID, not a CCW permit) is assumed to be a criminal, first and foremost.
The situation is improving slowly, but not without great cost at the individual level - the people who are getting screwed and then have standing to go through the very expensive, time-consuming, and disruptive legal process. Enjoy your rights out in Florida - but don't mistake CA for many of the other freer states in the country.|||Quote:
It has also been said that the officer is an Iraqi war veteran and that may have contributed to his actions.
I would claim offense at that belief, since it's a rehash of the "all Vets are PTSD-ridden KKKonservative babykillers!", but I would be unsurprised if he made such a claim. Sadly, there are probably almost as many ego-challenged soldiers as there are ego-challenged cops. But in the military, people who are in it for the self-appreciation generally wash out.|||Quote:
I would claim offense at that belief, since it's a rehash of the "all Vets are PTSD-ridden KKKonservative babykillers!", but I would be unsurprised if he made such a claim.
I don't believe that was really the issue here, but that doesn't make your claim any less of a strawman.|||That officer needs to be off the street. I know they have a rough job and deal with a ton of bad people each night but he made a lot of errors.
Going into a vehicle without even checking out the driver. Wow. Plus his abuse.
"How do I not know you?" Um....
"get lumps on you"
His threats to execute....
I'm curious, are the police car recordings available to the public? Or was this somehow leaked?|||As far as I know, dash cam video has to be officially released or leaked to be viewable by the public. Its evidence, and tends to be treated as such.
No comments:
Post a Comment