• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

arrested for OC while intoxicated

C

coolfrmn

Guest
@Venator,

Two things....
1. I like your book idea. Nice to see another form of 2A education other than the NRA's Eagles program. I wish you well with that.

2. I will concead to being biased towards LEOs.
a. I work with them
b. have some friends who are LEOs
c. have several family members who are LEOs
d. rode with them as a cadet in High School.
e. Have been LUCKY enough to have had great experiences with LE while CC by being super polite & open about my Carry status while they deal with me. Usually during a DUI Check point stop.

Not to say that I haven't had 2 dealings with LE that I would rather not have had. (I was too young to Carry, so it wasn't an issue)
 
D

DKSuddeth

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
833
Location
Bedford, Texas, USA
coolfrmn said:
I agree Eye... I just think there is a better/more professional way of proving your right. It's easier to hand them a copy of what your challenging them on then just saying you know your rights & challenging the LE. If what you are willing to challenge LE on, I would carry copies of the relative statutes.
Click to expand...

maybe you haven't been reading all the threads about LEO interactions on this board, but 95% of the LEOs who are offered the paperwork, decline. they will not let you show them up, period.
 
C

coolfrmn

Guest
Super Trucker said:
The problem with "going along with what the LEO wants" on the side of the road and worrying about it later is that, once you agree to be violated on the side of the road, you can not go back later and say they did something wrong.

When your dog shits on the carpet, do you wait until next week to teach him he was wrong?
Click to expand...

No. But my dog can't arrest me, shoot me, taser me or OC me. Bottom line for me is going home to my children & wife at the end of the day. I have to take chances at work. I don't like to do it off duty.

I prefer not to get into a legal battle on the side of the road. Does you no good to defend yourself/survive the deadly encounter only to loose your rights, family, everything by going to jail from not doing the right things after the shooting or during a LE stop.
As I've stated above. There are other ways to accomplish the same thing. One of them is to be proactive with educating LE. Not waiting to exploit their ignorance of the law on the side of the road. Yes, there is a reason I carry a 24 hour phone number for a 2A lawyer.

How about make an appointment with the LE leaders, during your meeting with the Chief/Sheriff, Training Officer, etc. give them a copy of the laws & a well formulated letter stating your views if there are "hot spots" dealing with LE. All while looking the part of a grown up. Sometimes you have to play the game..
 
C

coolfrmn

Guest
DKSuddeth said:
maybe you haven't been reading all the threads about LEO interactions on this board, but 95% of the LEOs who are offered the paperwork, decline. they will not let you show them up, period.
Click to expand...

I guess I haven't.. I have yet to read or hear a recording or see a video posted of a civilian offering paperwork..

Most of what I've seen/heard is the word game of "What laws? What did I do? I'm I free to leave? I'm I being detained." etc. That's ALL that citizen says. playing the stonewall game.

If there are threads, please show.
 
S

Super Trucker

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
263
Location
Wayne County, MI.
coolfrmn said:
No. But my dog can't arrest me, shoot me, taser me or OC me. Bottom line for me is going home to my children & wife at the end of the day. I have to take chances at work. I don't like to do it off duty.

I prefer not to get into a legal battle on the side of the road. Does you no good to defend yourself/survive the deadly encounter only to loose your rights, family, everything by going to jail from not doing the right things after the shooting or during a LE stop.
As I've stated above. There are other ways to accomplish the same thing. One of them is to be proactive with educating LE. Not waiting to exploit their ignorance of the law on the side of the road. Yes, there is a reason I carry a 24 hour phone number for a 2A lawyer.

How about make an appointment with the LE leaders, during your meeting with the Chief/Sheriff, Training Officer, etc. give them a copy of the laws & a well formulated letter stating your views if there are "hot spots" dealing with LE. All while looking the part of a grown up. Sometimes you have to play the game..
Click to expand...

All valid points, but I know in MI once you "agree to be violated" you are done, you can not unagree in court next week is all I am saying.

I agree with being involved/proactive in helping them learn the laws, (I was just at a council meeting 2 weeks ago, to get bad ordinances corrected) but sometimes things happen on the side of the road with little control.

Please take a moment and read post 7670 of this thread that happened to a MI member last week.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...ist-your-open-carry-experiences-here./page192
I would be willing to bet that sneaking up behind somebody doing nothing illegal and grabbing their gun unannounced is not their SOP.
Had the guy just bent over and got his rights trampled on the cop would have continued to trample on peoples rights simply "because he can".
Since this guy stood up for himself and if he follows up, the cop should learn not to do something so stupid in the future.

I am not saying to get yourself shot, but sometimes you do have to stand up for yourself (on the side of the road).
I hope you or I are never faced with a situation that needs anything to happen, but if it does I don't think it best to not have your rights danced upon.
 
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
The Big Guy said:
Hmmm! Curious. Somewhere along the line I got the idea that "We the People" WERE the government. But then I went to school too many years ago so I'm not up on today's revised history.

TBG
Click to expand...

We the People are the sovereigns--collectively. The government is an institution that does the day to day work--including acting as the employer of government workers. As an individual, you cannot hire, fire, or take personnel actions regarding government employees. At best, you can, as part of large bloc of voters, vote out of office those who appoint those who do the hiring if you don't like their employment choices and they are not responsive to complaints.

Can you imagine the chaos if a government employee foolishly thought every citizen who came up to him and claimed to be the employer was, indeed, his employer???

Saying the we are the boss or the employer of law enforcement officers is just a bit of silly hyperbole. We make much more credible advocates if we present realistic arguments.
 
Last edited:
C

coolfrmn

Guest
Super Trucker said:
All valid points, but I know in MI once you "agree to be violated" you are done, you can not unagree in court next week is all I am saying.

I agree with being involved/proactive in helping them learn the laws, (I was just at a council meeting 2 weeks ago, to get bad ordinances corrected) but sometimes things happen on the side of the road with little control.

Please take a moment and read post 7670 of this thread that happened to a MI member last week.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...ist-your-open-carry-experiences-here./page192
I would be willing to bet that sneaking up behind somebody doing nothing illegal and grabbing their gun unannounced is not their SOP.
Had the guy just bent over and got his rights trampled on the cop would have continued to trample on peoples rights simply "because he can".
Since this guy stood up for himself and if he follows up, the cop should learn not to do something so stupid in the future.

I am not saying to get yourself shot, but sometimes you do have to stand up for yourself (on the side of the road).
I hope you or I are never faced with a situation that needs anything to happen, but if it does I don't think it best to not have your rights danced upon.
Click to expand...

Point taken friend!!! This post & others is why I decided to order a Mini Digital Video Recorder & have my lawyer's number with me.

I too think it isn't in their SOP to grab at a gun nor very safe for anyone involved. :banghead: That LEO was a douche & lucky the citizen is a good guy.

I am lucky not to have had bad dealings with LE like others have on this site. Just watching YouTube and reading some of these threads screams of juvenile egos. Makes me suspect of their intent when their car is rigged with more electronics than an undercover LE during a sting. Along with pen & notepad at the ready.

I guess everyone has their comfort zone. My hats off to those that are willing and capable of pushing those lines. For me, Not so much, you guys know my comfort level & views. Thanks for allowing me to explain myself & for helping me see through your eyes.
 
Last edited:
C

coolfrmn

Guest
And yes, I am aware of dangerous LE & dangerous Commonwealth Attorneys. I've been keeping up with the Skidmark saga. If you are unaware of the Skidmark case. Go over to the Virginia Forum and look up Skidmark thread. I hope you have a little time on your hands. It's quite the read. Especially look at the back story about the Sheriff's office in Surry along with the DA. They have a track record of being.....mmmmmm.... not on the up & up.
 
Last edited:
Venator

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,462
Location
Lansing area, Michigan, USA
coolfrmn said:
@Venator,

Two things....
1. I like your book idea. Nice to see another form of 2A education other than the NRA's Eagles program. I wish you well with that.

2. I will concead to being biased towards LEOs.
a. I work with them
b. have some friends who are LEOs
c. have several family members who are LEOs
d. rode with them as a cadet in High School.
e. Have been LUCKY enough to have had great experiences with LE while CC by being super polite & open about my Carry status while they deal with me. Usually during a DUI Check point stop.

Not to say that I haven't had 2 dealings with LE that I would rather not have had. (I was too young to Carry, so it wasn't an issue)
Click to expand...

Thank you, hopefully you'll get a chance to read it sometime.

I sensed you alliance with LEOs, it was evident from you tone and writing. You are correct many LEO's are decent people and I work with many that are. It's the few that can ruin your life with ill wielded power.
 
P

Phssthpok

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
1,026
Location
, ,
coolfrmn said:
I guess I haven't.. I have yet to read or hear a recording or see a video posted of a civilian offering paperwork...
Click to expand...

You mean like this?

DKSuddeth said:
maybe you haven't been reading all the threads about LEO interactions on this board, but 95% of the LEOs who are offered the paperwork, decline. they will not let you show them up, period.
Click to expand...

Werd.
 
Last edited:
S

Super Trucker

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
263
Location
Wayne County, MI.
coolfrmn said:
And yes, I am aware of dangerous LE & dangerous Commonwealth Attorneys. I've been keeping up with the Skidmark saga. If you are unaware of the Skidmark case. Go over to the Virginia Forum and look up Skidmark thread. I hope you have a little time on your hands. It's quite the read. Especially look at the back story about the Sheriff's office in Surry along with the DA. They have a track record of being.....mmmmmm.... not on the up & up.
Click to expand...

I have been following that situation, it was posted a while back on a local forum I read. I will look at the back story though, I hadn't seen that.



BTW: Concerning post #67, I believe we are on the same page. :)
 
KBCraig

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
coolfrmn said:
It REALLY pays to read the small print on EVERYTHING!!
Click to expand...
Sure does! For instance, the fine print here is that the incident took place in Nevada, not Virginia.

But even that Virginia code you cited has some fine print. Here, I made it bold for you:

§ 18.2-268.2. Implied consent to post-arrest testing to determine drug or alcohol content of blood.

A. Any person, whether licensed by Virginia or not, who operates a motor vehicle upon a highway, as defined in § 46.2-100, in the Commonwealth shall be deemed thereby, as a condition of such operation, to have consented to have samples of his blood, breath, or both blood and breath taken for a chemical test to determine the alcohol, drug, or both alcohol and drug content of his blood, if he is arrested for violation of § 18.2-266, 18.2-266.1, or subsection B of § 18.2-272 or of a similar ordinance within three hours of the alleged offense.

B. Any person so arrested for a violation of clause (i) or (ii) of § 18.2-266 or both, § 18.2-266.1 or subsection B of § 18.2-272 or of a similar ordinance shall submit to a breath test. If the breath test is unavailable or the person is physically unable to submit to the breath test, a blood test shall be given. The accused shall, prior to administration of the test, be advised by the person administering the test that he has the right to observe the process of analysis and to see the blood-alcohol reading on the equipment used to perform the breath test. If the equipment automatically produces a written printout of the breath test result, the printout, or a copy, shall be given to the accused.

C. A person, after having been arrested for a violation of clause (iii), (iv), or (v) of § 18.2-266 or § 18.2-266.1 or subsection B of § 18.2-272 or of a similar ordinance, may be required to submit to a blood test to determine the drug or both drug and alcohol content of his blood. When a person, after having been arrested for a violation of § 18.2-266 (i) or (ii) or both, submits to a breath test in accordance with subsection B or refuses to take or is incapable of taking such a breath test, he may be required to submit to tests to determine the drug or both drug and alcohol content of his blood if the law-enforcement officer has reasonable cause to believe the person was driving under the influence of any drug or combination of drugs, or the combined influence of alcohol and drugs.
Click to expand...
Nothing at all there about implied consent at checkpoints.
 
C

coolfrmn

Guest
KBCraig said:
Sure does! For instance, the fine print here is that the incident took place in Nevada, not Virginia.

But even that Virginia code you cited has some fine print. Here, I made it bold for you:


Nothing at all there about implied consent at checkpoints.
Click to expand...

Got it !! Just giving an example from a place I could referance. It was meant to be a friendly "slippery when wet" sign. So as not to inadvertently loose the battle trying to win the war.
 
C

coolfrmn

Guest
Last edited:
M

MK

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
396
Location
USA
lowlux said:
I wished the cops had shot that drunk ass-hole, Before he killed someone with his car...

My sister was killed by a drunk driver and i watched a school bus get smashed by a drunk head on, Killed most of the kids....

Road blocks are to stop drunks and catch drug trafficers.... Don't go towards the road block if you see flashing lights if don't wanna deal with the cops.

I think they should ban him from owning a car and ban him from owning a gun, Belongs on the street with the rest of the drunk bums!
Click to expand...

I have yet to see one thing that shows that man was drunk or even had any trace of alcohol in his body. In fact, from what I've read, heard and seen up to this point, I am inclined to believe there wasn't any detectable amounts in his blood.

As far as the witch hunt against the entire population in order to weed out a few dangerous drunks, I feel the same way about pedophilia and child porn. I wish the authorities would come into your home unannounced two or three times a month at any random time day or night, go through your DvD collection, your papers, your closets and search your hard drive for evidence of child porn. I would feel alot safer about my own children to know that you are hounded without cause just in case you may be a threat some day. This world would be a much safer place if you and anyone like you who owns and home and a computer had their balls busted once and awhile just so they would never think of crossing that line and victimizing our children.
 
1245A Defender

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
n00b,,,,

hey low lux,, great first post!
way to read, and understand the gist and body of the whole thread!

and another thing, way to stand up for our 4th amendment!

and thank you to MK, for your nicely sarcastic idea to keep lowlux for pedophiling.

its for the children!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top