Fla Man sues Lincoln County Deputies
- Thread starter MatieA
- Start date
The_Outlaw
~The Dude Abides~
Not enough information here for me to make an informed decision on this case.
But thus far, I am leaning towards the Marine.
But thus far, I am leaning towards the Marine.
Can't wait for Navy to jump in here. Not that it's the way it should be, but if a cop asks me if I have a gun, and I have one legally, what's the problem with just telling him.
Yes, you don't have to constitutionally but it would have saved three people 40 minutes and a lot of aggravation if he just said yes, it's in my pack, or wherever.
I would have said 'yes, I have a permit and I'm legal'. End of story.
Rolling over? I don't have that many more 45 minutes left, life is short enough.
KK
Yes, you don't have to constitutionally but it would have saved three people 40 minutes and a lot of aggravation if he just said yes, it's in my pack, or wherever.
I would have said 'yes, I have a permit and I'm legal'. End of story.
Rolling over? I don't have that many more 45 minutes left, life is short enough.
KK
F
Flanmedic51
Guest
I agree w Outlaw, some info missing probably since its being investigated. But I'd like to know why the Deputies were inquiring if he had a gun repeatedly. What led them to that line of questioning? And how cooperative was the Marine? If you're legal, it pays to cooperate. But anywho, would you keep us posted MatieA? Love to see how this pans out. Hate to see sh** like this happen to a Vet if they were really busting his balls.
I have no idea what to make of this article. Always two sides to every story. But from what I read, I'm annoyed with this lawyer's implicit insistance that somehow this vet should get special treatment. The article goes on and on about his military service and I say, what does that have to do with anything??? How is his service experience relevant at all? Does he have more constitutional rights than non-military? Pure pandering in my opinion. What's even worse is the notion that because he doesn't look like "riffraff" he's some how not subject to the same laws. What a schmuck of an attorney who would base his claims on such irrelevant evidence. Bottom line if the cops were acting inappropriately whether he's a Vet or not, then I hope he prevails. As a vet, I would suspect that he would be the first to tell you that he fought so we all have the same rights and his aren't superior to the rest of us.
Did I hear someone call me?
What I think is hilarious...google "robert pierson pensacola". Most of the news reports can't even get the correct state!
Obviously a press release was distributed by the plaintiff. No way to have enough information to form an opinion one way or the other.
Personally, during a legitimate detainment, such as a traffic stop for a real reason, I have no problems answering the officer truthfully if I possess a gun or not (unless I knew I was carrying a firearm illegally, and then it would be the 5th Amendment). I know what the Supreme Court has ruled regarding lawful detaintments and "officer safety" rights. I won't volunteer the information without being asked, unless I am required to do so by law.
The first step in any police encounter, however, is to ascertain whether or not the officer is actually detaining you, or attempting to initiate a "voluntary" encounter.
BTW, I agree with Mojo57's post above; how's that for a shocker....
The first question any of you yahoo's should ask is "If the deputies are to record all of their stops, and the way i read it,there were two law enforcement vehicles on the scene and there is no recording, I see all the fault starting with the deputies, and yes I can say that as I is one.
Not shocked Navy. I knew you had in it you somewhere
The fact that Mojo uses Lawyer and scmuck in the same sentence is completely redundant. They are one in the same and synonymous with each other. Now that's redundant!
Why is it surprising that a Lawyer will pull every chain possible to get his client out of the frying pan?
Maybe he's setting the groundwork for PTSD. Oh oh, the soldier isn't going to like giving up his guns.
No recording seems a little suspicious and there is more to this story than being reported, Can't wait for 'the rest of the story'.
Get on that Navy! Ya hear?
KK
Page not found error. Bummer.
Try this: Casper Star-Tribune - trib.com - Wyoming News
then run a search for "Florida Man Sues"
It seems one has to initiate a search from the "home" page.
then run a search for "Florida Man Sues"
It seems one has to initiate a search from the "home" page.
Thanks guys! I got to the article. Now come the intemperate thoughts and any Vets out there, I am in no way impugning ANYones service. As far As I'm concerned any one that served our country is a hero to the Nation.
The article is about the violation of the mans 4th Amendment rights. I'm looking forward to the outcome of the mans suite.
But does it make any difference if the man served his country in Afghanistan or anywhere else? Does it matter if he served at all? His rights were violated by the detaining officers and the injection of his service record is only to garner sympathy and shadow the impact of the suite. Or so it would seem.
Am I wrong?
The article is about the violation of the mans 4th Amendment rights. I'm looking forward to the outcome of the mans suite.
But does it make any difference if the man served his country in Afghanistan or anywhere else? Does it matter if he served at all? His rights were violated by the detaining officers and the injection of his service record is only to garner sympathy and shadow the impact of the suite. Or so it would seem.
Am I wrong?
