Detained for Open Carry, Portland, Maine 26MAY2012

[The_Outlaw]

My yearly detainment in Portland.
I guess it's that time of year again. It seems every spring I get stopped by the Portland PD.
I got video this time
I also wrote an email to the police chief:Chief Sauschuck,
On 26MAY2012 at about 17:15 I was stopped by Officer J McDonald. I recorded a video of the stop for my protection. You can view the video at

Officer McDonald claimed to have received calls that I was walking around with a holstered firearm. This is a legal activity in Maine. He stopped me, put on gloves, and removed my weapon from me. I told him I do not consent to any searches or seizures. He unloaded my firearm and before ejecting the round from the chamber, he pointed my loaded firearm at my legs. This is unacceptable behavior.
There are many things that need to be taken into account here. Terry v Ohio requires three criteria to be met in order to disarm an individual. The officer must have a suspicion that the individual is armed. The officer must have a suspicion that the individual is dangerous. Thirdly, the officer must have a reasonable suspicion that the individual has committed or is about to commit a crime. Officer McDonald admitted in this video that the only reason he stopped me was for the legal carrying of my firearm and that he did not have any reason to suspect me of crime. Therefore, the seizure of my firearm was not allowed under Terry.
Secondly, having no suspicion of crime, why was I not free to go? Delaware v Prouse says that an officer cannot detain someone without reasonable suspicion of crime. McDonald had none. This is a sign of poor training and I want to bring it to your attention so that it can be easily remedied. All of your officers should know that they must have a suspicion of an actual crime before making a detainment.
Thirdly, Officer McDonald demanded my ID and would not return my firearm to me when I requested to end the encounter. Maine law in Title 17A Sec 15-A only requires someone to provide their name and DOB if the officer is issuing a summons to the individual. The officer said he needed to see my ID to ensure that I was not a felon. When asked if he had any reason to believe I was a felon, he said he did not. Again, he is making demands and detaining me without suspicion of any criminal activity. Terry requires more than a mere hunch to initiate a detainment. Hiibel v Nevada and Brown v Texas both require reasonable suspicion of crime before demanding an ID.
Officer McDonald admitted that the only reason why he stopped me was because of my legally carried firearm. I would like to point you to US v DeBerry from the 7th Circuit. In that ruling a federal judge said that a the presence of a firearm where legal to possess cannot by itself be reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
I believe that a lot of progress has been made under your direction to restore proper and legal police work in your city. I strongly believe that through proper training incidents such as this can be avoided. My suggestion to officers responding to a legally armed man in the future is this: Attempt to initiate a consensual encounter. If the individual does not consent to a police encounter, then observe that individual until such time that the officer develops a reasonable suspicion that crime is afoot. Only then should a detainment be made.
If you would like to discuss this further, please feel free to call. I am not a litigious person, but I do not appreciate violations of my rights.
Signed,
XXXXXXXXXX
Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX

I.m.h.o. your only succeeding at smoking your own tires.
May I suggest just carrying 'concealed' next time?
Problem solved. leasantry:

 

[Firefighterchen]

I.m.h.o. your only succeeding at smoking your own tires.
May I suggest just carrying 'concealed' next time?
Problem solved. leasantry:

Just because you hide from the problem, doesn't mean its not there.

 

[The_Outlaw]

Just because you hide from the problem, doesn't mean its not there.

Understood, if it was up to me, every law abiding citizen would be walking around openly with a firearm on their hip, but the darn horse is D.E.A.D. man! Stop beating it because she ain't getting up anytime soon.

If you open carriers really want to continue to waste your time and energy arguing with every cop you encounter on the street because of the countless number of anti-gun sheeple who are afraid of seeing your exposed sidearm, then go on ahead, have fun bitching about it.

My time is too damn precious to continuosly be stopped by cops for such nonsense.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Understood, if it was up to me, every law abiding citizen would be walking around openly with a firearm on their hip, but the darn horse is D.E.A.D. man! Stop beating it because she ain't getting up anytime soon.

If you open carriers want to continue to waste your time and energy arguing with every cop you encounter on the street because of the countless number of anti-gun sheeple who are afraid of seeing your exposed sidearm, then go on ahead, have fun bitching about it.

My time is too damn precious to continuosly be stopped by cops for such nonsense.

I'm not sure which horse you think I'm beating? The one that represents our rights? You want me to stop beating that horse? I sure hope that horse is not dead, nor ever will die...

Unless you mean concealed vs open carry horse? Cause I never brought that up. In fact this thread has little to do with OC, but more importantly about police abuse.

Have you open carried? you make some pretty definitive statements about all open carriers...I have never been stopped by an officer, because one open carrier was, and he did exactly what the OP did.

 

[MRHancock]

I see both sides to this and it could be debated till the end of the world. Which is in Dec if you didn’t know?

But how about this. If we do get to a point where LEOs will not stop and check someone OCing their gun then what would stop the bad guys from OCing. They think, well cops won’t stop people for OCing their gun so I will pretend that felony warrant does not exist and just open carry. They can’t stop me now.

Just something I thought of while thinking about this.

 

[eagleeyes]

i think folks should carry any way they see fit and works for them
i myself prefer conceal being a woman at my age i would fear flaunting my gun would attract a bg to see an easy prey to get a free gun
but like i said in another thread it should be personal choice and i think young strong men have less chance of having some creep sneaking up to steal their gun off their side than an elderly woman

 

[Firefighterchen]

I see both sides to this and it could be debated till the end of the world. Which is in Dec if you didn’t know?

But how about this. If we do get to a point where LEOs will not stop and check someone OCing their gun then what would stop the bad guys from OCing. They think, well cops won’t stop people for OCing their gun so I will pretend that felony warrant does not exist and just open carry. They can’t stop me now.

Just something I thought of while thinking about this.

A criminal that knows the law can all ready do that. A criminal isn't a criminal for following the law anyways. What if there were no laws forbidding murderers from murdering someone? Then what will stop the murderers? Sorry..but no law stating murder is illegal will stop murder.

Would you rather the police stopped and detained anyone they felt like, to check their papers? To make sure anyone wasn't a felon? You do know what that sounds like right?

How many people that LEO's stop for OC have turned out to be criminals? How many people that LEO's haven't stopped have turned out to be criminals?

"It's better to let 100 criminals go free than to convict one innocent man." - B Franklin

 

[Flanmedic51]

I realize the horse is dead..or maybe still gasping for air but this is the thing: OCing in Portland or S. Portland Maine, prepare for a LEO encounter. Rural Maine is a different beast than Portland-area Maine. People don't like guns and will call the police...or if it seems suspicious that someone has an open firearm and is missing the badge. I realize its perfectly legal to OC, but I would NOT OC in Portland because of these circumstances. And all it really is, is an inconvenience because if you're legal, you're legal and not getting arrested...but your time is being wasted. And for what? To make a point? I think the LEO in answering a gun complaint has the duty to ensure that the OCer isn't a felon...that's part of providing public safety in a frigged up world where people like to eat other people's faces. IMO, the OP has turned this into an opportunity to gain sympathy and to glamorize these encounters in an online forum.

Bottom line...LEOs have to answer the gun complaint to ensure public safety. The risk of an encounter is higher in Portland so expect it. Instead of bitching about it, either CC or plan more time in your day to be stopped by cops.

 

[SGB]

I'm still trying to understand- maybe you all can help me out.

I absolutely understand that the LEO was wrong. I too work in public safety and believe me, people inform us of our errors on a daily, if not hourly, basis. That being said, putting the fact the he was wrong aside, and bearing in mind that he was simply doing as other civilians requested, wouldn't it be easier not only for him, but also for you, to show him your ID, thus proving beyond 100% that you are doing nothing illegal? I understand the desire to correct wrong behavior, but this is a battle that has been going on for so long with regards to OC stops. Pick your battles. Like I asked, why not take the easy way out AND make yourself and the rest of us look better?

Perhaps my question is: "Do you all really think that with enough confrontations of this nature, these stops will decrease without the level of public safety decreasing as well?"

I sure hope you're not in LE.

 

[SGB]

Understood, if it was up to me, every law abiding citizen would be walking around openly with a firearm on their hip, but the darn horse is D.E.A.D. man! Stop beating it because she ain't getting up anytime soon.

If you open carriers really want to continue to waste your time and energy arguing with every cop you encounter on the street because of the countless number of anti-gun sheeple who are afraid of seeing your exposed sidearm, then go on ahead, have fun bitching about it.

My time is too damn precious to continuosly be stopped by cops for such nonsense.

Yet you have time to bltch about what others do here?

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."



--BENJAMIN FRANKLIN

 

[SGB]

I see both sides to this and it could be debated till the end of the world. Which is in Dec if you didn’t know?

But how about this. If we do get to a point where LEOs will not stop and check someone OCing their gun then what would stop the bad guys from OCing. They think, well cops won’t stop people for OCing their gun so I will pretend that felony warrant does not exist and just open carry. They can’t stop me now.

Just something I thought of while thinking about this.

With the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency this attitude that citizens should gladly accept the need to prove themselves innocent to the agents of the government shouldn't surprise me ............... but it does. "Ihre Papiere, Bitte!"

 

[SGB]

I realize the horse is dead..or maybe still gasping for air but this is the thing: OCing in Portland or S. Portland Maine, prepare for a LEO encounter. Rural Maine is a different beast than Portland-area Maine. People don't like guns and will call the police...or if it seems suspicious that someone has an open firearm and is missing the badge. I realize its perfectly legal to OC, but I would NOT OC in Portland because of these circumstances. And all it really is, is an inconvenience because if you're legal, you're legal and not getting arrested...but your time is being wasted. And for what? To make a point? I think the LEO in answering a gun complaint has the duty to ensure that the OCer isn't a felon...that's part of providing public safety in a frigged up world where people like to eat other people's faces. IMO, the OP has turned this into an opportunity to gain sympathy and to glamorize these encounters in an online forum.

Bottom line...LEOs have to answer the gun complaint to ensure public safety. The risk of an encounter is higher in Portland so expect it. Instead of bitching about it, either CC or plan more time in your day to be stopped by cops.

Dear God it's my sincerest hope that you never enter LE. Your post shows that the Constitutional protections are meaningless to you. Those that would violate the Law in the name of "public safety" are the worst kind of hypocrite.

 

[Flanmedic51]

I realize the horse is dead..or maybe still gasping for air but this is the thing: OCing in Portland or S. Portland Maine, prepare for a LEO encounter. Rural Maine is a different beast than Portland-area Maine. People don't like guns and will call the police...or if it seems suspicious that someone has an open firearm and is missing the badge. I realize its perfectly legal to OC, but I would NOT OC in Portland because of these circumstances. And all it really is, is an inconvenience because if you're legal, you're legal and not getting arrested...but your time is being wasted. And for what? To make a point? I think the LEO in answering a gun complaint has the duty to ensure that the OCer isn't a felon...that's part of providing public safety in a frigged up world where people like to eat other people's faces. IMO, the OP has turned this into an opportunity to gain sympathy and to glamorize these encounters in an online forum.

Bottom line...LEOs have to answer the gun complaint to ensure public safety. The risk of an encounter is higher in Portland so expect it. Instead of bitching about it, either CC or plan more time in your day to be stopped by cops.

Dear God it's my sincerest hope that you never enter LE. Your post shows that the Constitutional protections are meaningless to you. Those that would violate the Law in the name of "public safety" are the worst kind of hypocrite.

Yes because cops shouldn't respond to a gun call for fear of hurting someones feelings. Did the OP get arrested? Nope...time to move on.

 

[MRHancock]

With the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency this attitude that citizens should gladly accept the need to prove themselves innocent to the agents of the government shouldn't surprise me ............... but it does. "Ihre Papiere, Bitte!"

I don’t feel the need to prove that I'm innocent to anyone but I don’t have a problem with showing my id if asked by any LEO.

I think it’s very easy. If a LEO comes up to you while you are OCing and wants to see some ID then show it. Get the damn chip off your shoulder, they are doing their job. If you don’t have anything to worry about then there is no problem. They have a hard enough job as it is and they do not need some wannbe lawyer preaching the law to them because they don’t want to pull out their ID.

I have a feeling that you are a bitter person and have some sort of problem with something else.

I think I will move on from this thread.

 

[SGB]

I don’t feel the need to prove that I'm innocent to anyone but I don’t have a problem with showing my id if asked by any LEO.

I think it’s very easy. If a LEO comes up to you while you are OCing and wants to see some ID then show it. Get the damn chip off your shoulder, they are doing their job. If you don’t have anything to worry about then there is no problem. They have a hard enough job as it is and they do not need some wannbe lawyer preaching the law to them because they don’t want to pull out their ID.

I have a feeling that you are a bitter person and have some sort of problem with something else.

I think I will move on from this thread.

They are not doing their job which is exactly the point. Bad cops and poorly trained cops irritate the hell out of me, having a decade of doing the "job" behind my belt I fully understand what is and isn't doing the "job". So much for your crystal ball into my psyche my intellectually dishonest friend.

 

[SGB]

Yes because cops shouldn't respond to a gun call for fear of hurting someones feelings. Did the OP get arrested? Nope...time to move on.

Cops don't need to violate individual rights under the color of law, Law Enforcement literally means to enforce the law not make up your own. The "Authority" that uniform represents has limits, limits which professional LEO recognize and respect. Then there are those who make excuses for overstepping their authority in the name of public safety ........... it's a very thin excuse for abuse of authority. Under your guidelines the police should stop and ID every adult within a 1000 feet of a grade school to prove they're not registered sex offenders. Ihre Papiere, Bitte!

 

[the dark]

I see both sides to this and it could be debated till the end of the world. Which is in Dec if you didn’t know?

But how about this. If we do get to a point where LEOs will not stop and check someone OCing their gun then what would stop the bad guys from OCing. They think, well cops won’t stop people for OCing their gun so I will pretend that felony warrant does not exist and just open carry. They can’t stop me now.

Just something I thought of while thinking about this.

With the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency this attitude that citizens should gladly accept the need to prove themselves innocent to the agents of the government shouldn't surprise me ............... but it does. "Ihre Papiere, Bitte!"

Wow, is he the governor of Arizona, too!?

 

[Flanmedic51]

Yes because cops shouldn't respond to a gun call for fear of hurting someones feelings. Did the OP get arrested? Nope...time to move on.

Cops don't need to violate individual rights under the color of law, Law Enforcement literally means to enforce the law not make up your own. The "Authority" that uniform represents has limits, limits which professional LEO recognize and respect. Then there are those who make excuses for overstepping their authority in the name of public safety ........... it's a very thin excuse for abuse of authority. Under your guidelines the police should stop and ID every adult within a 1000 feet of a grade school to prove they're not registered sex offenders. Ihre Papiere, Bitte!

Everything that was done was routine. Asking for ID isn't infringing anyones rights. There are 2 elements present. The civilian gun carrier and the LEO. The LEO wants to prove no wrong doing/laws broken before he leaves the situation. Because after he walks away, the last thing he needs is the gun carrier to head to a downtown business where he was fired from and start killing people. There's more liability for the LEO to do NOTHING than for him to approach, ask questions and check for warrents, felonies, etc. As far as the civilian carrier, they feel their time was wasted and rights are infringed...and yet no one was arrested...just inconvenienced. That's the simple risk of OC people need to understand and not get uppity about getting stopped by the po po.

 

[SGB]

Everything that was done was routine. Asking for ID isn't infringing anyones rights. There are 2 elements present. The civilian gun carrier and the LEO. The LEO wants to prove no wrong doing/laws broken before he leaves the situation. Because after he walks away, the last thing he needs is the gun carrier to head to a downtown business where he was fired from and start killing people. There's more liability for the LEO to do NOTHING than for him to approach, ask questions and check for warrents, felonies, etc. As far as the civilian carrier, they feel their time was wasted and rights are infringed...and yet no one was arrested...just inconvenienced. That's the simple risk of OC people need to understand and not get uppity about getting stopped by the po po.

And here again you speak of that which you do not know. The Officer disarmed and detained without lawful authority. Period.

Do you claim to be ignorant of the SCOTUS decisions concerning LE liability as it pertains to the individual? Are you really this uninformed concerning constitutional law and the 4th amendment precedents or are you just too hard headed to admit you're wrong Mr. Sheepdog.

 

[Flanmedic51]

And here again you speak of that which you do not know. The Officer disarmed and detained without lawful authority. Period.

Do you claim to be ignorant of the SCOTUS decisions concerning LE liability as it pertains to the individual? Are you really this uninformed concerning constitutional law and the 4th amendment precedents or are you just too hard headed to admit you're wrong Mr. Sheepdog.

Hard headed is certainly not a farce but nothing I've said is erroneous...but as it pertains here, an investigation was in full force to answer a complaint of a MWAG. There's no liability to secure the firearm. There WOULD be liability to shrug it off and dire circumstances ensued if the OP was a criminal. Call up the Maine AG's office if you would like.