• 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.

Former Moderator

IanB

IanB

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2006
Messages
1,896
Location
Northern VA
imported post

Wow, did I just "get one up" on ole citizen the law dog? In my book PC means "we have all we need to take you downtown, charge you, and remand you to the magistrate".

With that, I'm going to bed.
 
C

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

nakedshoplifter wrote:
Wow, did I just "get one up" on ole citizen the law dog? In my book PC means "we have all we need to take you downtown, charge you, and remand you to the magistrate".

With that, I'm going to bed.
Click to expand...

Insofar as I did not particularly pursue your use ofa cite that did not support your position, yes.:):p

Which makes me wonder how sure you were, or whether you really knew what you were talking about when you first said it. Otherwise, why would you seek to confirm it with a cite that did not support your position?

I think you figured it out mid-way through the exchange. :):p

Which, in your case, makes it entirely accidental. :D:D
 
BobCav

BobCav

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,798
Location
No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
imported post

Hey! Like they used to say in the told time radio show "The Shadow";

"Who knows what evil lurks..."

Still around, still reading, still causing hate and discontent. How's things?
 
D

DKSuddeth

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
833
Location
Bedford, Texas, USA
imported post

McX wrote:
Refusing to cooperate gives anyone the impression that there is something else lurking in this matter.

Police are trained to investigate, to be observant, to seek anything abnormal.
Click to expand...
if someone is exercising a right while not breaking any laws and an LEO initiates a 'consensual' investigatory stop, there is absolutely no legal authority to surrender any information to said LEO. It is also going to be a personal decision whether said OCer 'wants' to cooperate with LEO. Refusal to cooperate in a consensual stop can leave said LEO with any impression they feel deeder minded to adapt in their mind, but without clear and articulate facts for reasonable suspicion, the 'consensual' stop must terminate.
 
B

bohdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
1,753
Location
Centreville, Virginia, USA
imported post

Mcx - I doubt anyone is irritated or upset with you, yet, lol. Take things with a grain of salt, this is the web. Luckily we have emoticons to help show what the writer is thinking with their words. :lol:

You asked a question, you want it to be narrowly answered. I think people have provided you that narrow answer, and even expounded on it a little for your benefit without you asking for it. That's generous :lol:.

Your point could be posited another way that is presented in many different ways on this forum. Your position is that you believe individuals should provide information to officers during situations when they are not required to, and when there is no justification for them to do so. Your position is that it would make the officer "feel" more comfortable about a person who is openly carrying a weapon - or that society would benefit somehow by allowing the officer to do so.

Guns make some people "feel" scared. That doesn't mean we should ban guns or that guns are by themselves bad. Along those lines are what people are presenting to you. Officers should not automatically assume that anyone carrying a weapon is an evil doer, as such officers should not be allowed to approach anyone openly carrying and question them without a valid reason. Coming up to a person walking down the street and asking them who they are for no reason and asking them for ID for no reason just because they are carrying a gun is like going up to a person of African or Spanish decent and asking them for ID to see if they are part of a gang.
 
IanB

IanB

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2006
Messages
1,896
Location
Northern VA
imported post

McX wrote:
Looks like I walked into a rather private conversation amongst others here. I rather turned the topic, and envoked some ire, so I'd better beat it.
Click to expand...
Nah, you're welcome to stay. Your fatal errorerror wasprofessing approval for authoritariansubmission on a rights and freedoms website. You also had the misfortune of jumping into a thread with two of the very first ODCO members, Citizen and myself... who take freedom and liberty quite seriously and won't easily give it away without just cause. Don't be so sensitive, and be willing to defend your opinions here if you want to discuss submission to authorities when you have done no wrong. We will not submit if we are not breaking the law.

You need to read the following attached PDF to understand.
 
IanB

IanB

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2006
Messages
1,896
Location
Northern VA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
Insofar as I did not particularly pursue your use ofa cite that did not support your position, yes.:):p

Which makes me wonder how sure you were, or whether you really knew what you were talking about when you first said it. Otherwise, why would you seek to confirm it with a cite that did not support your position?

I think you figured it out mid-way through the exchange. :):p

Which, in your case, makes it entirely accidental. :D:D
Click to expand...

I digress, my cite did support my position. The AG opinion says the officer was conducting an "investigatory stop". I doubt the officer would be performing that type of stop w/o some kind of suspicion. So, RAS is involved in the AG opinion, and the AG said RAS does not met the requirement for ademand of ID. The police may ask, and the citizencan refuse, however that seems to allow the police to detain you for a longer length of time so as to determin your proper identity through other means.

Interestingly, I have not found any VA code which mandates providing ID to police, even if they have PC. This means if I am out for a walk, not carrying my wallet, only house keys....and I'm arrested I could refuse to identify and they would book a John Doe?
 
Sheriff

Sheriff

Regular Member
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
1,968
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

McX wrote:
I would ask SHERIFF on here one thing: (SHERIFF you can envoke your right to remain silent); Sheriff, who would you want to deal with during an OC "encounter"- them or me?
Click to expand...

Well, first off, who exactly is them and me?

Let's see if this answers your question..... if I am openly carrying a firearm, and not breaking any laws whatsoever, I expect the cops to stay back and leave me the hell alone. Most of the cops where I live know I will file papers on them in a heartbeat if they step out of line and do anything wrongfully. I now consider it a public service, "training" the cops, the proper training they haven't seemed to have gotten so far. Sooner or later though, I am sure I will come across another rookie who makes up the law as he goes. A rookie who enforces what he thinks the law should be, not what it actually is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top