Decorated Combat Veteran Arrested in New York . . .

[bucs90]

This has nothing to do with what I said.

Do you even know what you said?

I don't play that bullshit game where some idiot can't even quote my post and quotes each sentence. I consider it editing what I said.

You think giving a cop a hard time is in your interest and you'll find that it isn't in your interest. That cop can request a warrant and have a warrant sent to him. Try telling the police complaint or a Judge how the cop requested a search of the interior your vehicle for sake of safety and you refused! Why would a cop allow someone to get back in their car that may possess a firearm? If you stand in the heat, cold, snow or the rain for 3 hours, it's your own fault. You may think that cop ought to be on the alert against you for 3 hours, but that isn't going to happen. File your reports and waste more of your time, who cares?

In many states it's not illegal to have a firearm in your vehicle and having one would not be probable cause for a search.

Yes it is. Court case: Terry vs Ohio.

States a cop can search a person for weapons (for safety) or a car. Its called a "Terry Frisk". If the cop knows or has reasonable belief that a person or car has a weapon, he can search...FOR WEAPONS ONLY...the person or car. If he finds other contraband during that search for a weapon, it is admissable.

So, if you have a gun in the car, and the cop knows it, he can search you and the car under Terry, due to the facts stating that you can be searched for a possible weapon, even if you aren't being charged with it.


In your house, if you call for a domestic dispute or something, cops can also walk through your ENTIRE house, called a "protective sweep", for people only to ensure they are not ambushed by an unknown person in the house. No drawers, no flipping open boxes, but they can walk through the entire house.




You wannabe lawyers and 2008-minted Constitutional scholars are gonna end up in jail for this shit one day. What a bunch of idiots.

 

[Dubya]

I, like the poster above, absolutely refuse to allow any searches of my vehicle unless I am going onto a military installation. While they are "asking" your permission, they really aren't. You have a choice, allow the search or leave.

My wife and son also have been told to lock the doors and pocket the keys and to refuse the search.

That cop who stops you is just trying to do his job and protect the public. You right-wingers want to behave like assholes and waste the resources of that cop on your worthless asses. What if that cop is needed somewhere else in a real emergency, while you play your bullshit games.

Why don't your kind just get out of this country? You only care about yourselves and never the consequences of your foolish behavior.

I, along with members of my family, spent many years of our adult lives in service to protect those rights.

I don't cede them to anyone, including the police.

Who cares? Don't do it and grow icicles!

 

[bucs90]

It is AMAZING how ignorant people are about the real law regarding police work. And the people who the most sure about their knowledge on what the cops are doing wrong...are the ones most wrong about the topic.

So, all the anarchist right wingers out there, let me just put this simple for you.

99% of cops are great cops, honest, and enforce the law well, and they use the "playbook" to make pieces fit together perfectly legal so that they can protect the public from violent and thieving people.
1% of cops are bad apples, who dont give a fuck about the law and only want to ruin your day as much as they can until the day they too get arrested and fired.

However...100% of cops know more about police work and the laws surrounding it than all of you idiots. 100% of cops will WIN any confrontation you decide to start to challenge them. If you pull some stunt with a video camera and try to get a "gotcha" moment on a cop for some bullshit petty law that you dug up (and they exist on youtube) that simply means you caught one of the 99% who know it's not worth it to just bust your ass anyway. But you didnt win. See, you'll get so proud of that "gotcha" moment, that you'll keep doing it. And doing it. Until you try it on one of those 1% guys and you get your face busted or put in jail.

The best advice? Accept most cops are good cops, doing a tough job. If they stop you and inconvenience you for a few minutes, just shut up and be polite. It'll get you a long way. And if you aren't doing anything major, you'll probably just get a ticket or warning anyway. You start trying to playing like you are Captain Constitution on them, and you'll lose.

So, know your local laws. Know the laws of the places you are going. Follow them. And if stopped, be polite, because it probably isnt a big deal, and it wont be a big deal unless you make it one.

See? How EASY that can be?

 

[bucs90]

I, like the poster above, absolutely refuse to allow any searches of my vehicle unless I am going onto a military installation. While they are "asking" your permission, they really aren't. You have a choice, allow the search or leave.

My wife and son also have been told to lock the doors and pocket the keys and to refuse the search.

That cop who stops you is just trying to do his job and protect the public. You right-wingers want to behave like assholes and waste the resources of that cop on your worthless asses. What if that cop is needed somewhere else in a real emergency, while you play your bullshit games.

Why don't your kind just get out of this country? You only care about yourselves and never the consequences of your foolish behavior.

I, along with members of my family, spent many years of our adult lives in service to protect those rights.

I don't cede them to anyone, including the police.

The police also "protect those rights".

Your freedom of speech; freedom from unlawful search and seizure; freedom of religion; right to bear arms;

Who can deny you those rights? The police. No one else. No one else has the authority to take your rights, thus, those rights rest in their hands to protect. Being a cop is a MASSIVE responsibility, its a huge amount of power, and thankfully, most accept that huge responsibility with a noble manner and treat that power, well, like a gun....very cautiously.

 

[Dubya]

A decent person would give law enforcement it's due respect knowing they are doing a dangerous job to protect and serve the public. Throughout my life, I've never liked owing anyone anything, so when people do a service for our community that includes me, am very grateful for the job they do. If you have gratitude for people serving in the military, you should have gratitude for a cop. Cops always carry a gun and even when they are off duty they are always on the lookout for crime.

 

[OKTexas]

Do you even know what you said?

I don't play that bullshit game where some idiot can't even quote my post and quotes each sentence. I consider it editing what I said.

You think giving a cop a hard time is in your interest and you'll find that it isn't in your interest. That cop can request a warrant and have a warrant sent to him. Try telling the police complaint or a Judge how the cop requested a search of the interior your vehicle for sake of safety and you refused! Why would a cop allow someone to get back in their car that may possess a firearm? If you stand in the heat, cold, snow or the rain for 3 hours, it's your own fault. You may think that cop ought to be on the alert against you for 3 hours, but that isn't going to happen. File your reports and waste more of your time, who cares?

In many states it's not illegal to have a firearm in your vehicle and having one would not be probable cause for a search.

Yes it is. Court case: Terry vs Ohio.

States a cop can search a person for weapons (for safety) or a car. Its called a "Terry Frisk". If the cop knows or has reasonable belief that a person or car has a weapon, he can search...FOR WEAPONS ONLY...the person or car. If he finds other contraband during that search for a weapon, it is admissable.

So, if you have a gun in the car, and the cop knows it, he can search you and the car under Terry, due to the facts stating that you can be searched for a possible weapon, even if you aren't being charged with it.


In your house, if you call for a domestic dispute or something, cops can also walk through your ENTIRE house, called a "protective sweep", for people only to ensure they are not ambushed by an unknown person in the house. No drawers, no flipping open boxes, but they can walk through the entire house.




You wannabe lawyers and 2008-minted Constitutional scholars are gonna end up in jail for this shit one day. What a bunch of idiots.

If you read Terry there has to be reasonable suspicion for the stop, random stops would not qualify under Terry. From Terry: This reasonable suspicion must be based on "specific and articulable facts" and not merely upon an officer's hunch."

Terry v. Ohio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[bigrebnc1775]

A decent person would give law enforcement it's due respect knowing they are doing a dangerous job to protect and serve the public. Throughout my life, I've never liked owing anyone anything, so when people do a service for our community that includes me, am very grateful for the job they do. If you have gratitude for people serving in the military, you should have gratitude for a cop. Cops always carry a gun and even when they are off duty they are always on the lookout for crime.

You watch way to much cop TV
1. cops aren't legally obligated to protect you
2. when off duty cops aren't looking for anything but sometime away from the job
3. because I was a cop and honorably discharged from the air force you should bow down before me and kiss my feet.

 

[Dubya]

A decent person would give law enforcement it's due respect knowing they are doing a dangerous job to protect and serve the public. Throughout my life, I've never liked owing anyone anything, so when people do a service for our community that includes me, am very grateful for the job they do. If you have gratitude for people serving in the military, you should have gratitude for a cop. Cops always carry a gun and even when they are off duty they are always on the lookout for crime.

You watch way to much cop TV
1. cops aren't legally obligated to protect you
2. when off duty cops aren't looking for anything but sometime away from the job
3. because I was a cop and honorably discharged from the air force you should bow down before me and kiss my feet.

You bat a 1000 about being wrong on every post. I don't watch TV and I wouldn't know if there is cop TV.

My best friend in the Marines became a Tampa cop once he left the service and I've hung out with at least three others on that force. I'll give you a hint, they weren't like you and I can understand how if you were a cop, you wouldn't be one now. You're too fucked up to be a cop.

 

[RoadVirus]

Oh my God! He had empty AR-15 magazines! He's going on a killing spree!!!!!!!! Arrest him before he can hurt anyone!!

I see a new lawsuit against the state of New York on the horizon.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I amazed at how many of you are experts on this incident without knowing the facts of it.

 

[Dubya]

Oh my God! He had empty AR-15 magazines! He's going on a killing spree!!!!!!!! Arrest him before he can hurt anyone!!

I see a new lawsuit against the state of New York on the horizon.

The case boils down to whether the magazines were made after some date specified by the NY law around '93. Your hero claims he thought the magazines were legal, which means he knew about the law. These gun control measures have only affected the sales of guns and accessories after a certain date. The federal assault weapons "ban" only affected weapons manufactured after a certain date and had a sunset provision. It was a temporary ban on sales.

The only issue is whether the guy broke the law and all that decorated veteran crap is bullshit. Only veterans serving short enlistments during certain periods of time are not decorated veterans. Being a veteran doesn't give a person the right to break the law. The odds of this person not being found guilty are very slim. Cops are very good at determining if a law has been violated, because that's their job.

Don't expect to hear about the outcome of this case! The same rags aren't going to report the guy being found guilty as charged.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Oh my God! He had empty AR-15 magazines! He's going on a killing spree!!!!!!!! Arrest him before he can hurt anyone!!

I see a new lawsuit against the state of New York on the horizon.

The case boils down to whether the magazines were made after some date specified by the NY law around '93. Your hero claims he thought the magazines were legal, which means he knew about the law. These gun control measures have only affected the sales of guns and accessories after a certain date. The federal assault weapons "ban" only affected weapons manufactured after a certain date and had a sunset provision. It was a temporary ban on sales.

The only issue is whether the guy broke the law and all that decorated veteran crap is bullshit. Only veterans serving short enlistments during certain periods of time are not decorated veterans. Being a veteran doesn't give a person the right to break the law. The odds of this person not being found guilty are very slim. Cops are very good at determining if a law has been violated, because that's their job.

Don't expect to hear about the outcome of this case! The same rags aren't going to report the guy being found guilty as charged.

This story is all over the wingnut blogosphere and as often as not the people commenting are acting as though this is directly related to the new NYS gun laws.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Can the state prove when the magazines were made?

It may well be that the NY law is unConstitutional and there is surely a need for a Surpreme Court ruleing on NY's laws.

 

[Dubya]

Oh my God! He had empty AR-15 magazines! He's going on a killing spree!!!!!!!! Arrest him before he can hurt anyone!!

I see a new lawsuit against the state of New York on the horizon.

The case boils down to whether the magazines were made after some date specified by the NY law around '93. Your hero claims he thought the magazines were legal, which means he knew about the law. These gun control measures have only affected the sales of guns and accessories after a certain date. The federal assault weapons "ban" only affected weapons manufactured after a certain date and had a sunset provision. It was a temporary ban on sales.

The only issue is whether the guy broke the law and all that decorated veteran crap is bullshit. Only veterans serving short enlistments during certain periods of time are not decorated veterans. Being a veteran doesn't give a person the right to break the law. The odds of this person not being found guilty are very slim. Cops are very good at determining if a law has been violated, because that's their job.

Don't expect to hear about the outcome of this case! The same rags aren't going to report the guy being found guilty as charged.

This story is all over the wingnut blogosphere and as often as not the people commenting are acting as though this is directly related to the new NYS gun laws.

Of course they are commenting that way, because they are stupid people. The first thing I did was check the story out, but looking for the facts doesn't concern their kind. I don't have to make up things to support my point of view and obviously these stupid people do. It would piss me off just as much, if someone I shared a point of view with on an issue was behaving like that and lying. Lying just makes your position look worse.

 

[there4eyeM]

The police can charge anyone with anything. It's the District Attorney who handles the actual charges and the case.

If the man broke the law, he broke the law. It doesn't matter if he's a veteran.

It matters if they preformed an illegal search. This is the very reason I've told my wife if she is ever stopped by the police and asked to get out of the vehicle, to lock it. And if asked, refuse to consent to a search without a warrant. We don't have anything to hide and in TX you can legally carry a gun, the point is to stand up for our rights under the 4th Amendment.

Smart, I tell my family members the same thing, exit the vehicle if asked, lock the doors whey you get out, answer "YES I mind" if you are aked by a cop "Do you mind if we search your car". If a police officer takes your keys from you by threat of violence or arrest and then opens your car and searches it w/o probable cause, he leaves himself open to both criminal and civil ramifactions and should be told this if he attempts to take your keys to perform a search. Once the car is locked they lose their; I merely looked in the car to ensure both my safety and the drivers, bs. People need to know their rights in this nation and need to be part of the process of protecting them. The first thing I do if pulled over by a cop is take my keys out of the ignition and hold onto them. If asked to step out, I lock the doors and the keys go in my pocket. Been asked a few times do you mind if I search your car and I answer with a damn yeah I mind. Once had a cop call a dog to search for drugs around my car, nothing found of course, but have never had one force the issue by taking my keys and illegaly searching my car.

Nothing wrong with exercising rights. Problems revolve around when one cannot.

 

[tjvh]

Driving too fast, driving too slow, failed to make a complete stop... It's easy to justify pulling someone over and it's easier to justify searching their car.

Yeah... Remember when we were told not wearing seat belts would be a secondary offense, that cops were not going to pull you over unless you committed a more serious offense? I remember it well. How things have changed. Well, let's be honest... Gun control is in the same stage as the seat belt Law was in the not too distant past. If people think gun grabbers are going to be content with just banning the scary looking guns... Then I have a bridge to sell them, because they're not using their heads.

 

[Dubya]

Can the state prove when the magazines were made?

It may well be that the NY law is unConstitutional and there is surely a need for a Surpreme Court ruleing on NY's laws.

The present NY law limited magazine from 10 rounds to 7 rounds, applied it even to police and hasn't went into effect yet. The law limiting magazine size to 10 rounds started around '93 and has been the law in NY. Magazines do have production numbers that can determine when they were made. To be legal, they would have had to be made before the date banning their sale in NY. The law also prohibited importing illegal magazines. That cop would be in a position to check the numbers on the magazine and determine if the magazines were legal or illegal under NY law.

The Supreme Court has never determined that people have a right to own oversized magazines and it never will. Only gun nuts consider that a violation of the 2nd Amendment. You people who are talking about a Supreme Court challenge are dreaming. The people making a big deal out of this case are dreaming. It has nothing to do with the Cuomo gun control legislation. Your right-wing sites will spread a bunch of lies and be quiet when the guy is found guilty, unless a miracle happens and the cop made a mistake. If they ever report the guy was found guilty, they will lie their asses off to make another bullshit case. Just because the law isn't the way you want it to be, doesn't mean it isn't the law.

 

[Dubya]

Driving too fast, driving too slow, failed to make a complete stop... It's easy to justify pulling someone over and it's easier to justify searching their car.

Yeah... Remember when we were told not wearing seat belts would be a secondary offense, that cops were not going to pull you over unless you committed a more serious offense? I remember it well. How things have changed. Well, let's be honest... Gun control is in the same stage as the seat belt Law was in the not too distant past. If people think gun grabbers are going to be content with just banning the scary looking guns... Then I have a bridge to sell them, because they're not using their heads.

Did they tell you it would always be a secondary offense and the law would never be changed?

Why can't you figure out, we don't really care what you think?

 

[Dubya]

Why can't you figure out, we don't really care what you think?

"we?"

And why's your rep off, pussy.

Figure it out, retard, and let me see you turn your rep off!

We are the people in polls wanting things like universal background checks supported by about 86% of the people and you are the idiots who never want to change anything for the better.

 

[there4eyeM]

It isn't control of firearms, it's assuring only responsible people handle them.