[Ralph McLaney]

Catch 22 for CCW permit holders.

Court upholds police pointing gun at lawful carriers.


http://www.examiner.com/x-5619-Atla...pholds-police-pointing-gun-at-lawful-carriers

 

[slim 60]

sounds like one officer thinks hes the law an not just an enforcer of the law..if what he said is true about him being the only one carrying a gun
on his beat..
this is one of those,, guess you had to be there,, things though.
im sure if the ccw carrier is really in the right ..the nra did everything they could for him.. we can hope anyway..slim
ps.. this is the type case where they need to step up just as the naacp
does in such cases..

 

[45-70 nut]

It is called a CONCIELED permit for a reason. CCW permit holders need to be aware that your weapon should be well hiden at all times, this guy apparantly did not do a very good job doing so. with that said the officer was well in the wrong to take his gun and permit.

 

[jmortimer]

There are two types of peace officers the Barney Fifes and the Andy Taylors, There is the "letter of the law" and the "spirit of the law." The officer in this case sounds like a Barney Fife clown. Also, as they say "bad facts make bad law" and here the doofus attorney should never have let his CCW be seen in the first place as indicated by 45-70 nut.

 

[marsms]

And I still can't get over the fact that some of you folks are allowed to carry a weapon down the street!

 

[Ranch Dog]

And I still can't get over the fact that some of you folks are allowed to carry a weapon down the street!

And I can't get over the fact that some of you folks are not allowed to carry a weapon down the street! I'd hate to live where you do!

 

[marsms]

Yeah, me too!

 

[MikeG]

Depends where you are, and what the consequences are of letting a weapon be seen. Here, it is an offense to let your concealed carry weapon be seen on purpose. I don't know how "on accident" is defined.

If I present my CHL to a peace officer, the officer has the option of disarming me. None ever have but they have the right.

Whether the officer is in the right to confiscate a weapon and a license is probably up to the DA's office.... again, as stated, keep them concealed!!!!

 

[Ralph McLaney]

Not a Constitutional Right if.....

"For most people, this would be enough to conclude that they were being harassed for the exercise of a constitutional right..."

If you have to have government permission, it is not a constitutional right!

 

[unclenick]

Yes. That's the crux of it. It's still a privilege. And Mike has it correct, too. A friend of mine used to have a Massachusetts carry permit and he said not letting a concealed weapon be seen is considered paramount there. They believe the mere sight of a gun can reasonably be expected to cause mass panic. Well, I suppose it might cause Mass panic, anyway? Post Boston Tea Party, the official government position seems to be that the citizenry of that state has lost the stern stuff it was once made of.

At any rate, when you consider officers there are charged with not allowing a "reveal" to go unpunished, and considering I don't know what their policy on drawing a sidearm is, I expect the only thing the officer did that was technically incorrect was declaring himself the sole legal gun carrier on his beat. I hope, for his own sake, that he's incorrect, because, if not, if he ever has to call for backup, they will be obliged to show up unarmed.

 

[forestdavegump]

What a bunch of who-wee, huh. Good piont Nick just sounds like a rookie. It is after all called a "concealed" carry or "concealed" weapons permit. Guess that means you shouldn't be able to see it huh? My guess is he will be more careful in the future. They didn't say if he got the gun and permit back? That would be nice to know!

 

[Ralph McLaney]

Now lets paraphrase the situation.

How would you feel if the situation was changed?

How about this:

"Conservation and Wildlife Officer, J. Doe, reasoned that because he could not confirm the 'facially valid' Hunting license , he would not permit the to sportsman to continue to hunt. Officer Doe then drove away with the sportsman's hunting license and rifle, leaving the hunter alone, unarmed, dressed in a camoflage suit, and facing what the officer himself agreed was a long walk in an area known for its large bear population."

 

[Range Junkie]

I can see both sides of this. As a law enforcement officer myself I will do everything in my power to go home after my shift. I too have drawn a gun on a person who had a concealed weapons permit. However this was on a traffic stop and I saw it laying in the front seat right next to him as my partner was approaching him from the driver's side. After I drew my gun and told my partner why, the driver immediately stated "I have a permit to carry it". We asked him to step from the truck and show us his permit at which time he did. We finished the traffic stop and sent him on his way with his gun and permit in his possession. He understood why I pulled my gun and stated "I should not have had it lying in the seat like that" which was true. I have come into contact with a lot of people over the years who have carry permits, especially on traffic stops. They will usually tell me as soon as I make contact with them that they have a permit and a gun in the car. I will just ask where it is and thank them for informing me. I can see an officer pulling his weapon on a person who he sees carrying a gun. However, I don't understand keeping the gun and the permit and I don't like the statement that he is the only one that can carry a gun on his beat. That statement just makes him sound unprofessional. Of course, there are three sides to every story....one person's side, the other person's side, and the media's side. Unfortunately the media wrongly reports things on a regular basis.

 

[MZ5]

Unfortunately the media wrongly reports things on a regular basis.

Now that's for DANG sure! I don't believe I've heard a correct report on _any_ story I've ever been interviewed about, nor had first-hand (and pretty well complete) information about. Sometimes they're close, but just mess up some 'details' (which often changes the character of the story, unfortunately), and sometimes one can't hardly help but think it's an intentional smear job.

I do appreciate Ralph's counterpoint, and my incredulity at what this story would suggest was the Circuit Court's lack of consideration of it is a part of what makes me wonder how much else there actually is underlying this story.

 

[jmortimer]

The primary "fact" is that the man's gun and permit were taken. In and of itself that is the bottom line and Officer Barney Fife done wrong. Hopefully SCOTUS will hear this case. Again, bad facts make bad law and attorney numb-nut should never have been seen with a CCW in the first place.

 

[BarkBuster20]

From my understanding, it is illegal to "brandish" a firearm. Just because you have a ccw doesnt mean you "give up" your right to open carry. I know in certain places you cant open carry, but in the vast majority of states, it is legal to open carry.

in a place where it is lawfull to open carry, would a law officer draw on somone with a holsterd pistol? Or any legal sidearm? I am guessing so, sadly enough. Look at it from this perspective, look at the number of people nation wide that happen to be law abiding citizens legally carrying a sidearm, who accidently get shot by a law officer.

Now when you consider that, its not looked upon very well when a "trained law officer" is pointing his pistol at you, without just cause. How do you think a law officer would feel if he had a pistol pointed at his head? well i guess thats what there all afraid of, but they have no reserves when it comes to pointing it at somone elses head.

I know there are cases where the officer is justified in holding his gun on somone, but in a lot of instances it is uncalled for, and sometimes even deadly.

 

[osprey572ci]

And I can't get over the fact that some of you folks are not allowed to carry a weapon down the street! I'd hate to live where you do!

Amen Ranch..

 

[thegrandenigma]

Still waiting for it. . .

Can't do much except that and NFA membership.

 

[mattsbox99]

The new 2A

"you have the right to keep and bear arms, unless you are in the general vicinity of a prick police officer that absolutely must exert his authority over you, in which their rights will not be infringed"

By the way, the police do NOT have any more authority than you do, nothing in the constitution gives the police any more power than Joe Citizen.

 

[AVIVIII]

^^ Thumbs Up ^^