Attitude of Some Police re: Open Carry

[wuzfuz]

Recently in Pierce County, WA, a gentleman was in a Starbuck's enjoying his regular morning cup of starter fluid. He had been comin in for his AM coffee for two years, and during that two years, he had his semi-auto pistol on his hip, as Washington is an Open Carry state. This morning was different, however. A Pierce County deputy sheriff entered the shop and demanded the man's identification. The man refused, rightly, IMHO, as he was doing nothing wrong. He was arrested, handcuffed and taken to jail. A spokesman for the department stated than when there is a possible threat, the police have the right to investigate. Why do some police figure that your gun is a possible threat, and theirs is not? How does a citizen legally exercizing his Second Amendment rights constitute a threat? I understand the charges were eventually dropped, but as a former LEO myself, I don't see the reason for the arrest to begin with. Does a citizen legally carrying his sidearm in accordance with state law actually equate with a wild-eyed maniac shooting up a peaceful business? I think the deputy owes the gentleman an abject, sincere apology.

 

[Kasper]

Recently in Pierce County, WA, a gentleman was in a Starbuck's enjoying his regular morning cup of starter fluid. He had been comin in for his AM coffee for two years, and during that two years, he had his semi-auto pistol on his hip, as Washington is an Open Carry state. This morning was different, however. A Pierce County deputy sheriff entered the shop and demanded the man's identification. The man refused, rightly, IMHO, as he was doing nothing wrong. He was arrested, handcuffed and taken to jail. A spokesman for the department stated than when there is a possible threat, the police have the right to investigate. Why do some police figure that your gun is a possible threat, and theirs is not? How does a citizen legally exercizing his Second Amendment rights constitute a threat? I understand the charges were eventually dropped, but as a former LEO myself, I don't see the reason for the arrest to begin with. Does a citizen legally carrying his sidearm in accordance with state law actually equate with a wild-eyed maniac shooting up a peaceful business? I think the deputy owes the gentleman an abject, sincere apology.

Just goes to show how the Police are trying to keep the public pissed at them. You would think that after what has happened here in Washington that the LEO's would want to have a better rapport with the communities they serve and protect.

I feel that the LEO's in Washington State are in for a rude awakening if they continue acting the way they have been acting. For the last two weeks Seattle LEO'S have been shown on the news for their over use of force when dealing with citizens. The LEO that murdered the wood carver and the outcome of the report showed the public just how immune the LEO's are when breaking the laws that they are to be enforcing.

So for now I would not open carry my firearm unless you want to take the chance at being shot by the LEO's. And from the report the LEO's will be justified in murdering you due to you having a gun on your hip that lead them to fear for their safety.

So for now if you OC you need to to be ready to give your ID to the LEO or get ready to go to jail. Even though the LEO's have no right to stop and detain you they will.

 

[vettefreak]

sounds like a great case for a civil suit

 

[Oldgrunt]

sounds like a great case for a civil suit

It could be a great case except it would probably cost the man in question a fortune. There was another thread on here a while back where an individual was OCing in Starbucks and had four deputies questioning him. In that case he held his ground and, after several minutes, they backed off. I used to have a lot of respect for LEOs but that is dwindling now and it seems you have to be prepared for a confrontation everytime you OC anywhere! Guess we should organize now into groups to educate our local populace and the LEOs about our rights and stick to it, even filing law suits. Ridiculous to have to go that far but, what the hell, I'm retired and don't have anything else to do. :angry:

 

[santa]

I think that most leo are honest and are trying to do the right thing. However there are plenty of bad leo(some of which are where I live) who give a bad name to the honest ones. Many states have a 'stop and identify' laws requiring a person to show ID to an leo when asked. In this case I would definately consult with a knowledgable lawyer.

 

[mappow]

I'm not sure why anyone would have issue with presenting ID to a LEO that asked. Far beyond your understanding of current activity that you, not an LEO, have no idea about current criminal conditions in your area. (Unless you keep a scanner which I always have thought is a bit freaky anyway) A simple request by a LEO to me is not intrusive upon my 4th Amendment Rights. IMHO
The OP states that the individual has been doing this for years, yet no mention how long the SO has been coming to the local coffee shop. The story line gives a bias to the nice guy coming to the shop for years and all of a sudden this big bad SO, wild with POWER, is coming to assault you by asking for ID. While I agree in principal that the LEO really didn't have the right. Why escalate the situation? Does the LEO and any P.C. or not. What was his motivation to initiate contact?
I do agree as stated above that on face value, this really isn't a good stop/question. BUT most LEO's usually won't initiate contact unless they feel something amiss or justified (PC). As I've heard a few times over the years, YOU may beat us in court, but you're not gonna beat the ride to jail. A cool, level head is what should prevail while we OC/CC, not belligerence.

 

[rlkraatz]

2nd Amendment Right

HI
Everyone in this country has a 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. When it is a right it should not be questioned. A holstered gun is not a threat. A holstered gun should not be questioned.

Every policing area of this country should have a citizen review board. The review board should be made up of 4 citizens and 3 police officers. A review board should review each and every case that comes in question of being legal. After this review board starts to act on these cases they will stop.

Until we have citizen review boards the problems will continue.

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CONSTITUTION !

 

[Mainsail]

Link? I haven't heard this and if it's true then it's not normal Pierce County procedure. A link to the 'rest of the story' would help.

 

[Oldgrunt]

I'm not sure why anyone would have issue with presenting ID to a LEO that asked.

Mappow: I agree with you for the most part. My biggest objection is to how the situation is handled from the get-go. If the LEO approaches as a storm trooper, he will immediately raise the ire of the carrier. I feel that the attitude displayed initially will dictate how the situation develops. I don't mind showing my ID when I am carrying but do not enjoy being treated like a criminal. I will show the same respect to the LEO that he expects from me. (But, by the same token, I will not show my rear end and have to take that ride in the back of a cruiser.) Doesn't cost anything to be cordial and makes for a pleasant day.:biggrin:

 

[NavyLCDR]

Link? I haven't heard this and if it's true then it's not normal Pierce County procedure. A link to the 'rest of the story' would help.

The OP is talking about Tom Brewster.

Link Removed

 

[NavyLCDR]

I'm not sure why anyone would have issue with presenting ID to a LEO that asked.

If Joe Schmoe citizen came up to you in Starbucks and asked to see your driver's license would you show it to him?

Tom Brewster was doing nothing in Starbucks other than ordering coffee, which is what people do in Starbucks. In that case, the person behind him was no more than Joe Schmoe citizen, just because he happened to be an off-duty Sheriff Deputy, because the off-duty Sheriff Deputy was not acting upon any indication at all that a crime had been committed or was about to be committed.

When the off duty Deputy called for backup and three other uniformed officers arrived, they still had no more authority than Joe Schmoe off the street to ask to see Tom Brewster's driver's license. So why does a uniform make the difference, mappow? If I was in my Navy Lieutenant's uniform, would you show me your driver's license in Starbucks because I asked you for it?

What some police officers need to understand, more so than even the average citizen, is that in states such as Washington, a holstered handgun is no different than a holstered cell phone. One of the major problems we face as a gun community is that supposed "pro-gun" people fail to see that as well. Just look at this thread:
http://www.usacarry.com/forums/conc...support-nation-wide-constitutional-carry.html

I have great respect for police officers. I think 99% of them are good, honest, hard working people. Unfortunately, the 1% of them that are bad get 99% of the media/public attention..... just like gun situations, 99% of the time the gun is no issue at all, but the 1% of the time when the gun is involved in a bad situation - that gets 99% of the media/public attention.

 

[Itstjs]

Hm, dont know what to say to this one, seen alot of things like this on here, especially about OC, where does the LEO see the threat? Was the man dressed like a thug? Doubtful, was he waving it around? Seemingly not... All I picture is an honest man, dressed in his AM work clothes, carrying a cup of coffee, I dont see the harm in this, and rightfully there isnt.
LEOs [not all but a good slice anyways] need to realize the ones you need not worry about are the ones who have their weapon displayed for all to see, they need to worry about the ones who look like theyve just robbed a liquor store...Ones where theyre slid into a wasteband, no holster, and the shirt just barley covering it...Or better yet, maybe they should read the state laws, and especially ones pertaining to guns. :to_pick_ones_nose:

 

[NavyLCDR]

Hm, dont know what to say to this one, seen alot of things like this on here, especially about OC, where does the LEO see the threat?

Everybody knows that a law abiding citizen, who knows what their rights are, exercises those rights, and is armed while doing so is a threat to no one except the government.

 

[santa]

Everybody knows that a law abiding citizen, who knows what their rights are, exercises those rights, and is armed while doing so is a threat to no one except the government.

leasantry: I agree with what you say but may I add two words after government--and criminals. I guess that government and criminals are sometimes one in the same. It seems to me that these leo need to read the law and the Constitution particularly the 4th and 5th amendments.

 

[Bighouse Doc]

These crooks with badges were clearly in violation of Washington statute and well established case law.

"When police break the law, there is no law. Just a fight for survival."-Billy Jack

-Doc

 

[Kasper]

The OP is talking about Tom Brewster.

Link Removed

Thanks NavyLT for clearing that up for me I thought that it had happened again.

 

[Oldgrunt]

Education is the key.

NavyLT: Your basic premise is valid but the greatest problem in an open-carry situation is that the LEOs usually do not, in most cases, know the law and don't know how to react when someone conversant in the law challenges them. They seem to take it as a threat to their masculinity and the problems start. Also, it would not be uncommon for the local constabulary to dispute anything you might say, even if you read them the law, chapter and verse. We have a group down here now that is pushing to enlighten the law enforcement communities to our rights under both the Second Amendment and our state law. Education is the key to the problem. Until that is achieved, I can see no reason to take offense when a LEO makes an ID check and can't see the need to pump up my testosterone level to get into a heated argument. In the short run, I would lose; in the long run I can be vindicated but why go through all that hassle? Life is too short to walk around with a chip on one's shoulder.:no:

 

[NavyLCDR]

NavyLT: Your basic premise is valid but the greatest problem in an open-carry situation is that the LEOs usually do not, in most cases, know the law and don't know how to react when someone conversant in the law challenges them.

And, therefore, I must cater to them and willfully relinquish my rights at their whim?

BTW, the Washington State Constitution offers stronger protections of rights than the US Constitution does:

http://www.leg.wa.gov/LAWSANDAGENCYRULES/Pages/constitution.aspx

SECTION 7 INVASION OF PRIVATE AFFAIRS OR HOME PROHIBITED. No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.

SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.

 

[mappow]

If Joe Schmoe citizen came up to you in Starbucks and asked to see your driver's license would you show it to him?

Tom Brewster was doing nothing in Starbucks other than ordering coffee, which is what people do in Starbucks. In that case, the person behind him was no more than Joe Schmoe citizen, just because he happened to be an off-duty Sheriff Deputy, because the off-duty Sheriff Deputy was not acting upon any indication at all that a crime had been committed or was about to be committed.

When the off duty Deputy called for backup and three other uniformed officers arrived, they still had no more authority than Joe Schmoe off the street to ask to see Tom Brewster's driver's license. So why does a uniform make the difference, mappow? If I was in my Navy Lieutenant's uniform, would you show me your driver's license in Starbucks because I asked you for it?

What some police officers need to understand, more so than even the average citizen, is that in states such as Washington, a holstered handgun is no different than a holstered cell phone. One of the major problems we face as a gun community is that supposed "pro-gun" people fail to see that as well. Just look at this thread:
http://www.usacarry.com/forums/conc...support-nation-wide-constitutional-carry.html

I have great respect for police officers. I think 99% of them are good, honest, hard working people. Unfortunately, the 1% of them that are bad get 99% of the media/public attention..... just like gun situations, 99% of the time the gun is no issue at all, but the 1% of the time when the gun is involved in a bad situation - that gets 99% of the media/public attention.

LT your explanation is way more then the original post. Hence my comment on the original post. This situation escalated due to numerous factors, all of which were not expounded on.
I fail to see nothing, but my rights. I also will not stand toe to toe with an LEO. (rhyme unintended) Being a citizen with rRghts does not guarantee me those Rights to be honored in the street all the time. Hopefully more education of ALL will help ebb these anomalies.

 

[Oldgrunt]

And, therefore, I must cater to them and willfully relinquish my rights at their whim?

BTW, the Washington State Constitution offers stronger protections of rights than the US Constitution does:

Washington State Constitution

Hey L.T.: Nope, don't mean that at all. As I said, we are all in a learning process down here as well as other places. As a rule, open carry has not been done for quite some time to the degree people are pushing for now and and that is taking some getting used to by both LEOs and the general populace. This is going to be an educational process showing what our rights are and needs to be done without everybody having a confrontational attitude. I had a long talk with our sheriff concerning OC and he has no problem with it and there is even a short film clip of him on here giving his views. It may take a little time to get everything where we want it but we will get there. You are extremely fortunate in having Washington State provide such protection of your rights as are the people of Texas, Arizona, and all the other states who are more progressive about gun rights. As for catering to LEOs and willfully relinquishing our rights, no, we do not do that. We push back, but not so far as to get arrested. There is more than one way to skin a cat. I can see where you are coming from and respect your opinion in doing things as you feel best. That is what we do, also. And to coin a phrase, "Different strokes for different folks.":biggrin: