Philly police threaten to shoot a man open carrying

[WellHungSmurf]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-vUYeJXSrA&feature=player_embedded#at=263

Philly Police Harass, Threaten to Shoot Man Legally Carrying Gun
by John Stossel | May 16, 2011

A story in today's Philadelphia Daily News shows why it's so important that citizens be allowed to videotape cops - it can be citizens' only way to fight back against police abuse of power.

This incident happened several weeks ago in Philadelphia to Mark Fiorino, a 25-year-old IT worker who carries a gun on his hip at all times for self defense. He got the gun after several friends were mugged.

But he didn't count on attacks by police:

On a mild February afternoon, Fiorino, 25, decided to walk to an AutoZone on Frankford Avenue in Northeast Philly with the .40-caliber Glock he legally owns holstered in plain view on his left hip. His stroll ended when someone called out from behind: "Yo, Junior, what are you doing?"

Fiorino wheeled and saw Sgt. Michael Dougherty aiming a handgun at him.

What happened next would be hard to believe, except that Fiorino audio-recorded all of it: a tense, profanity-laced, 40-minute encounter with cops who told him that what he was doing - openly carrying a gun on the city's streets - was against the law.

"Do you know you can't openly carry here in Philadelphia?" Dougherty asked, according to the YouTube clip.

"Yes, you can, if you have a license to carry firearms," Fiorino said. "It's Directive 137. It's your own internal directive."

Fiorino was right. It was perfectly legal to carry the gun. But that didn't matter to the cop:

Fiorino offered to show Dougherty his driver's and firearms licenses. The cop told him to get on his knees.

"Excuse me?" Fiorino said.

"Get down on your knees. Just obey what I'm saying," Dougherty said.

"Sir," Fiorino replied, "I'm more than happy to stand here -"

"If you make a move, I'm going to f------ shoot you," Dougherty snapped. "I'm telling you right now, you make a move, and you're going down!"

"Is this necessary?" Fiorino said.

It went on like that for a little while, until other officers responded to Dougherty's calls for backup.

Fiorino was forced to the ground and shouted at as he tried to explain that he had a firearms license and was legally allowed to openly carry his weapon.

"You f------ come here looking for f------ problems? Where do you live?" yelled one officer.

"I'm sorry, gentlemen," Fiorino said. "If I'm under arrest, I have nothing left to say."

"F------ a------, shut the f--- up!" the cop hollered.

The cops discovered his recorder as they searched his pockets, and unleashed another string of expletives.

Fiorino said he sat handcuffed in a police wagon while the officers made numerous phone calls to supervisors, trying to find out if they could lock him up.

When they learned that they were in the wrong, they let him go.

But only temporarily. Fiorino posted the audio recordings on youtube, and now they are harassing him again:

A new investigation was launched, and last month the District Attorney's Office decided to charge Fiorino with reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct because, a spokeswoman said, he refused to cooperate with police... He's scheduled for trial in July.

If one listens to the audiotapes, it's hard to imagine how a reasonable person could charge Fiorino (and not the cops) for disorderly conduct.

[Irving]

Is there such a thing as self defense against a police officer?

[josh7328]

Wow that really pisses me off. What freakin morons. These a- holes are a disgrace to all honorable LEO'S. They should all be fired immediately.

[DeusExMachina]

Just obey what I'm saying. Makes me sick.

[Bailey Guns]

Agreed. This is disgraceful.

[sneakerd]

Agree totally with Deus, that's why I would never even consider carrying openly ANYWHERE, as I would be waiting for something like that to happen. I know that several forum members do that sometimes, I don't know- just for fun or to see what happens, I've seen the posts. I'm not interested in that kind of exposure.

[Dusty Johnson]

I think the situation could have been handled better by the LEO's. On the other hand open carrying is just asking for trouble.

What if this guy in some way was making the LEO's nervous by his actions? A audio recording won't show that.

[WellHungSmurf]

Agree totally with Deus, that's why I would never even consider carrying openly ANYWHERE, as I would be waiting for something like that to happen. I know that several forum members do that sometimes, I don't know- just for fun or to see what happens, I've seen the posts. I'm not interested in that kind of exposure.


I agree 110%. I respect our law to carry openly but why not invest in a CCW and not have to deal with this. Just not worth the trouble my .02

[josh7328]

Agree totally with Deus, that's why I would never even consider carrying openly ANYWHERE, as I would be waiting for something like that to happen. I know that several forum members do that sometimes, I don't know- just for fun or to see what happens, I've seen the posts. I'm not interested in that kind of exposure.

I open carry occasionally, but only because our wonderful representatives have denied me my second amendment right because I am 20 and can't CC. I am active duty army, married, with a baby on the way... but I am OBVIOUSLY too immature to EARN my constitutional RIGHT to protect myself and my family. Forgive me for my rant.

[talon]

this is just sad, when LEO's are that oblivious to carry laws its quite frankly scary. You never know if the cop thats got you at gun point is a little too trigger happy, it just goes to show you that cops are still human just like the rest of us and aren't perfect. With that being said thanks to all of the LEO's that actually understand the laws and enforce them properly.

[sneakerd]

Hey Josh, that's no rant. At 20 yoa, you are more willing to try cheat the rapids -so to speak-. As I've gotten older- I'm 51, I'm a mite more wary of getting my arse in a sling, as I might pull a hamstring trying to get out.

[josh7328]

this is just sad, when LEO's are that oblivious to carry laws its quite frankly scary. You never know if the cop thats got you at gun point is a little too trigger happy, it just goes to show you that cops are still human just like the rest of us and aren't perfect. With that being said thanks to all of the LEO's that actually understand the laws and enforce them properly.

Yeah. Agreed. You know I was talking to a friend of mine once who is a cop for CSPD. The subject of carrying came up and I showed him my 1911 in the glove box of my car, and he started swearing up and down that I had to have a CHL to carry in my car, and that I could be arrested for concealing it. He calmed down after I actually showed him the law, but it does prove just how clueless SOME LEO'S can be.

[BigMat]

I hate being so litigious, but I feel like this guy could bring suit against the city, and in turn bring attention to his case.

Having a firearm pointed at you, being insulted (if in public), being taken down, etc. all with no lawful reason or lawful suspicion seem like reasons enough to bring a very reasonable suit.

Might at least make all his new legal trouble more affordable. [Tooth]

[Elhuero]

I have never open carried a handgun, but I'm going to start.

Not bashing cops, but the reaction to this incident that I've seen from LEOs on other forums makes me sick.

In big liberal cities it really is turning into us vs. them.

[sneakerd]

Good luck Elhuero- I'll still vote for you even if a video of you comes up on 9News!

[Zundfolge]

For those of you here that are members of law enforcement that seem so vexed as to why there are so many of us here that don't trust the police, can't you see how situations like this contribute to that distrust?

But when folk like me bring this up we get smacked down for "cop bashing". That doesn't really help the situation either.

Can't we all just get along?
-Rodney King



this is just sad, when LEO's are that oblivious to carry laws its quite frankly scary. You never know if the cop thats got you at gun point is a little too trigger happy, it just goes to show you that cops are still human just like the rest of us and aren't perfect.
I understand that these officers may simply be ignorant and its all a big miss understanding. But the bar for the police just must be set higher. For example I'm a Graphic Designer, if I mess up at worst your name might be misspelled on your business cards, or if I get all malicious, maybe I'll photoshop your head on a goat or something but if YOU mess up; innocent, law abiding citizens can have their lives ruined or ended.

There needs to be better training in the law for the officers on patrol ... and there has to be punitive measures for police that over react and jeopardize the lives of law abiding citizens.


With that being said thanks to all of the LEO's that actually understand the laws and enforce them properly.Yeah, both of you.

KIDDING :D (don't shoot)

[sneakerd]

I'm not jumping on that bandwagon myself. I just don't cotton to "chasing the dragon" so to speak. I seem to remember a term in Philosophy 101, called "begging the question". I like to keep a lower profile. Don't need no headlines. Willing to chance going unarmed exept for a Spyderco folder.

[sniper7]

The enforcers of the law don't know the laws.... who would have guessed. Some self rightious douche pulls a gun and tries to use his power. He should be fired and held criminally liable. I hope the open carry guy is a millionaire after this and the police academy is looking for new recruits.

[Zundfolge]

Oh thats right I was going to comment on open carry.

Ya know, I've OCd a bit here and there and frankly I don't like it. I MUCH prefer carrying concealed.

The gun gets hooked on things, bangs on things, scratches and dents stuff I don't want scratched and dented (including the gun) and since the gun is not held as closely to the body its less comfortable. Even if there were no social or legal problems with OC I'd still rather CCW (and that doesn't even get into tactical issues).

Maybe that explains why some cops are so surly ... they have to OC. [ROFL1]

[Byte Stryke]

this is just sad, when LEO's are that oblivious to carry laws its quite frankly scary. You never know if the cop thats got you at gun point is a little too trigger happy, it just goes to show you that cops are still human just like the rest of us and aren't perfect. With that being said thanks to all of the LEO's that actually understand the laws and enforce them properly.


Remember when I crash your banks servers and destroy your entire life's savings... I'm Just human and not perfect.


[Rant2]

[streetglideok]

I feel for the good cops out there who feel ashamed to have to be lumped into the same group as these cops in phili. That kind of stuff makes the public nervous around cops. These guys are the ones wanting a police state. With this situation, it looks like the victim was trying to be as civil as he could, to explain things, and the cops had their own vendetta. Lets say they felt nervous around this guy and wanted to check him out, and make sure he is legit. There is alot better ways to dealing with the victim here then how they did. They are paid to be professionals, and that wasnt professional, period. If the guy had a legal right to open carry, he doesnt deserve to be treated in such a manor. That kind of behavior could turn into pulling anyone over, and handling it like a felony stop, just because they are driving, and could be up to no good. Just one more reason I do not care for the new england liberal mentality.

[cstone]

No comment from me regarding the accuracy of the news story. I will stipulate to the story as being accurate.

This citizen should obtain competent legal counsel and enrich himself and his attorney at the expense of the taxpayers of Philadelphia. Not just for the treatment by the officers on the street, but for the apparent prosecutorial misconduct when he was charged after the fact by the District Attorney's office. It looks like retaliation for the negative publicity of posting the audio recordings on-line.

Just my opinion.

In a perfect world, we could call for a second or third opinion on traffic stops [Flower]

[Byte Stryke]

I think the primary point here is that you should not be FORCED to CC...

Police in this matter could have handled this in a Much more professional manner.

Not all cops are shitheads.


That's my anti-cop-bashing statement for the week :)

[sneakerd]

Responding to streetglide's post. Speaking for myself only- I don't recall ever feeling nervous around coppers, unless I was doing something wrong. It may sound stupid, but they're gonna have to beat up a lot more innocents before that happens. I have always felt that cops were my friends, and I have the same to desire to give them a "thumbs up" as I would a combat veteran.

[cstone]

Not all cops are shitheads.

Do all IT people like Star Trek? [ROFL1]

[bryjcom]

It seems like the "street" cops are a little more fearful of citizens being armed then the DOW rangers and even the local sheriffs that approach me when I'm shooting in Pawnee. When they approach me and my other friends they are mostly out numbered and definitely OUT GUNNED, but that doesn't make them freak out and act like that douche bag cop in Philly.

The big cities are full of complicate, uniformed and unarmed people and when they see someone actually exercising their rights that makes them a little angry it seems.


I've had a cop ask to search my car and NOT get permission by me, and bitch and moan, but he ultimately backed down. I have also had a cop instantly start searching my car and refused to back down after repeated requests to stop what he was doing.

I think most cops know the law and will obey it but there are lots that know the law and choose to ignore it.

[cstone]

An interesting point you raise regarding LEOs who routinely deal with well armed individuals (game wardens) and street cops who mostly deal with armed individuals who are criminals.

My brother-in-law is a game warden in northern VA. He deals with both hunters, fisherman, etc... Many of the hunters he deals with are poaching or otherwise hunting illegally and he routinely has to disarm them, write tickets and send them on their way without their prized boom stick. Rarely has even the worst of these individuals pointed a gun at him.

On the other hand, just up the road in DC, there is a basic assumption that the only people in possession of a handgun are either LEOs or criminals. Even the Heller decision has not brought about major changes in the right of DC residents or visitors to carry (openly or concealed). If a cop encounters someone on the street in DC, and that person is armed, they will be proned out and treated like a criminal until they either produce a badge or are in cuffs.

The difference 10 miles distance makes in the way LEOs react has as much to do with the jurisdiction as it does with situation they are dealing with.

Not every professional acts professional.

[Irving]

I just think the officer should be charged with Felony Menacing with a deadly weapon. No other hard feelings.

[cstone]

I just think the officer should be charged with Felony Menacing with a deadly weapon. No other hard feelings.

Have you gone down to the local prosecutor's office and told them how you feel? Those lawyers really love it when cops come in and give them advice on what people should be charged with. I'm guessing the prosecutors would much rather be told what they should do by citizens who walk in to see them. [ROFL1]

[Irving]

Heh, touche. Officer doesn't need to be dragged through the mud or anything. Just have a felony on his record.

[rondog]

Yes, the cops were out of hand IMO, but.....

I find it odd that the guy had a live recorder running before the incident started. Walking down the street wearing a gun, with a recorder running, who does that? I'm wondering if this is the same guy that's done several videos where he deliberately struts past LEO's while OC'ing, just to antagonize them so he can rant about "exercising his rights" and get material for YouTube.

[KevDen2005]

An interesting point you raise regarding LEOs who routinely deal with well armed individuals (game wardens) and street cops who mostly deal with armed individuals who are criminals.

My brother-in-law is a game warden in northern VA. He deals with both hunters, fisherman, etc... Many of the hunters he deals with are poaching or otherwise hunting illegally and he routinely has to disarm them, write tickets and send them on their way without their prized boom stick. Rarely has even the worst of these individuals pointed a gun at him.

On the other hand, just up the road in DC, there is a basic assumption that the only people in possession of a handgun are either LEOs or criminals. Even the Heller decision has not brought about major changes in the right of DC residents or visitors to carry (openly or concealed). If a cop encounters someone on the street in DC, and that person is armed, they will be proned out and treated like a criminal until they either produce a badge or are in cuffs.

The difference 10 miles distance makes in the way LEOs react has as much to do with the jurisdiction as it does with situation they are dealing with.

Not every professional acts professional.


I have two good friends that are DC cops and I happened to do a ride along with them last summer. I did a ride along with one of them last summer and we contacted a few people that were illegally armed. DC cops routinely deal with armed criminals. I talked to them a little bit about the heller decision and their legal updates. They seem to have lots of knowledge on the subject and were well aware of the changes (not that every DC cop does, I definitely had some run-ins with a couple when I lived out there). It is still illegal in DC to have a gun (for the most part) outside of your home and it is extremely rare that they will give out a CCW

[KevDen2005]

Yes, the cops were out of hand IMO, but.....

I find it odd that the guy had a live recorder running before the incident started. Walking down the street wearing a gun, with a recorder running, who does that? I'm wondering if this is the same guy that's done several videos where he deliberately struts past LEO's while OC'ing, just to antagonize them so he can rant about "exercising his rights" and get material for YouTube.


If it is the same guy and they prove that he was deliberately antogonizing then the disorderly might stick.

Other than that, I think the cops were out of line and it pisses me off that that we share the same profession, when these guys don't know the laws in their city.

But, the recorder thing not only fishy to me, but also just has audio, no visual, so I don't want to put too much into what the cops did or did not do and the same with the guy that was open carrying, we just can't see his actions so I am not going to jump to too many conclusions.

[Irving]

Many people who advocate open carry, carry audio recorders for exactly this reason. I was under the impression that it is pretty much SOP for the movement.

I too have noticed that once a certain population density is reached, things really start to change. It even happens on websites like ours. I've seen similar changes while working at different sized companies as well. Once you get to a certain amount of people, the rules get more and more strict to try and keep everyone in line. I've noticed it, but I'm not sure quite how I feel about it.

It's kind of along the lines of the whole "too big to fail" line of thought. If some emergency happens in a small community, it is easy for people to band together to work things out. It's easy for the government to interact with people in person and keep everything lubricated. As things get bigger, there are more people that slip through the cracks and it is much more difficult to keep people calm and keep the community together as a whole. What might be a small, or even non-issue, in a small community, is treated as a serious threat in a large community.

This would make a pretty interesting thesis about how communities change as they increase in size. Not to mention the ease of movement from community to community with personal and public transportation being readily available. Don't forget about instant communication and organization via wildly evolving technology.

How do you effectively return such a populated country back into a series of communities?

[cstone]

This is a little off topic, however, I was a uniformed cop in DC for several years. Still have friends working there.

Never heard of a single CCW issued by the Chief of MPDC. Heller essentially allows residents to legally possess a registered handgun in their home without having it locked or disassembled.

DC cops are not being unprofessional when they prone out someone they believe is carrying a handgun. They do it because the mere possession of the handgun makes the carrier a criminal, unless they are a LEO in DC. VA and MD cops do not routinely carry in DC as they have no authority in DC. There are a few exceptions, however DC has numerous federal police departments in addition to all of the different federal agents who are carrying. It is one of the strangest jurisdictions in the country. You may have one department handling a sidewalk on one side of a street, MPDC handling the street, and another department handling the sidewalk on the other side of the street.

All of the prosecutors in DC are US Attorneys (federal) with the exception of Corporation Counsel who only handle minor infractions.

Just traveling from the White House to Reagan National Airport, a citizen will travel through at least five different police jurisdictions in the span of five miles.

The best part about working in DC is everyone is important and everyone is special [ROFL1]

Did I mention how much I like living in Colorado? [Flower]

[Outlaw1]

To be honest, I have been pretty shocked to see how many liberals were here in Colorado (Denver area) considering all the beautiful wide open spaces for hunting & fishing. There is no way in hell I'd open carry. Just the looks I get from people when I'm in Denver in my Dodge MegaCab dually on mud tires is enough to make me feel really uncomfortable.

Last month I was pulled over for speeding when I was entering New Mexico on I25. I realized I was speeding when my radar detector started screaming at me and I saw the officer on the side of the road. I thought I'd save him the trouble of having to chase me down, so I pulled over as soon I passed him. He had just kicked on his overheads. Before he walked up I turned off the engine, left my headlights on, rolled down all my windows and turned on my interior light so he could see into my truck. When he asked for my license he immediately asked me if I had any weapons. There were two rifles in a locked gun case behind the back seat and a compound bow locked in a case, which I explained to him. He asked me why I had so many guns with me. It kinda caught me offguard. Typically I have several more. He asked me several times if I had a concealed carry permit, which struck me as odd as well.

On another note, he kept insisting I sign the speeding ticket as 'guilty'. When I asked about my options he got pretty pissed at me and insured me he would appear in court. Last week I called their courthouse to set up a court date and the person I spoke with said the judge won't give anyone defensive driving or deferred adjudication that was going 10mph over the speed limit and the officer claimed I was doing 21mph OVER the speed limit. In the last 21 years I've only had one speeding ticket. I just find it odd that a judge won't offer some kind of bargaining. So, if you know of any traffic lawyers that practice in Raton, please let me know. :)

[KevDen2005]

This is a little off topic, however, I was a uniformed cop in DC for several years. Still have friends working there.

Never heard of a single CCW issued by the Chief of MPDC. Heller essentially allows residents to legally possess a registered handgun in their home without having it locked or disassembled.

DC cops are not being unprofessional when they prone out someone they believe is carrying a handgun. They do it because the mere possession of the handgun makes the carrier a criminal, unless they are a LEO in DC. VA and MD cops do not routinely carry in DC as they have no authority in DC. There are a few exceptions, however DC has numerous federal police departments in addition to all of the different federal agents who are carrying. It is one of the strangest jurisdictions in the country. You may have one department handling a sidewalk on one side of a street, MPDC handling the street, and another department handling the sidewalk on the other side of the street.

All of the prosecutors in DC are US Attorneys (federal) with the exception of Corporation Counsel who only handle minor infractions.

Just traveling from the White House to Reagan National Airport, a citizen will travel through at least five different police jurisdictions in the span of five miles.

The best part about working in DC is everyone is important and everyone is special [ROFL1]

Did I mention how much I like living in Colorado? [Flower]


Four years in DC, and that was enough for me.

[KevDen2005]

To be honest, I have been pretty shocked to see how many liberals were here in Colorado (Denver area) considering all the beautiful wide open spaces for hunting & fishing. There is no way in hell I'd open carry. Just the looks I get from people when I'm in Denver in my Dodge MegaCab dually on mud tires is enough to make me feel really uncomfortable.

Last month I was pulled over for speeding when I was entering New Mexico on I25. I realized I was speeding when my radar detector started screaming at me and I saw the officer on the side of the road. I thought I'd save him the trouble of having to chase me down, so I pulled over as soon I passed him. He had just kicked on his overheads. Before he walked up I turned off the engine, left my headlights on, rolled down all my windows and turned on my interior light so he could see into my truck. When he asked for my license he immediately asked me if I had any weapons. There were two rifles in a locked gun case behind the back seat and a compound bow locked in a case, which I explained to him. He asked me why I had so many guns with me. It kinda caught me offguard. Typically I have several more. He asked me several times if I had a concealed carry permit, which struck me as odd as well.

On another note, he kept insisting I sign the speeding ticket as 'guilty'. When I asked about my options he got pretty pissed at me and insured me he would appear in court. Last week I called their courthouse to set up a court date and the person I spoke with said the judge won't give anyone defensive driving or deferred adjudication that was going 10mph over the speed limit and the officer claimed I was doing 21mph OVER the speed limit. In the last 21 years I've only had one speeding ticket. I just find it odd that a judge won't offer some kind of bargaining. So, if you know of any traffic lawyers that practice in Raton, please let me know. :)


Sounds like that jurisdiction is hurting for money.

[jreifsch80]

i was thinking about the guy that "baits" leos by open carrying and it made me think, isn't that basicly a civilian doing a reverse "sting" operation? i don't have a problem when the police do legal sting operations so why should we get huffy about a regular person doing the same thing to help inform people? though in my opinion the best thing you could do is to completely comply with the officers even if they are abusing your rights then sue the crap out of whoever you can. when people are walking around open carrying and also having an audio recorder in their pocket then that's pretty pathetic, and not the person with the recorder but it's pathetic that they actually have to carry these recorders "just in case" they run into an officer of the law that doesn't know the law. how can one inforce something they don't know? fortunatly there ARE alot o good cops out there, but a "bad" cop is obviously alot more dangerous than just about anyone else that's "bad" at their job so they should be reprimanded or punished acordingly.

[jreifsch80]

To be honest, I have been pretty shocked to see how many liberals were here in Colorado (Denver area) considering all the beautiful wide open spaces for hunting & fishing. There is no way in hell I'd open carry. Just the looks I get from people when I'm in Denver in my Dodge MegaCab dually on mud tires is enough to make me feel really uncomfortable.

that reminds me of when i went to my cousins graduation from cu boulder years ago, i literally had a few people yelling curse words at me as i calmly chugged through town in my modded 06 cummins. i guess the people's republic of Boulder don't like whistling turbos and smoke belching straight pipes, though i'm sure my huge nebraska cornhusker mud flaps didn't help me much there either lol man i miss my diesel, it worked very well in making tools blaring loud annoying music roll their windows up very fast especially if they were foolish enough to stop next to my tail pipe [ROFL1]

[mcantar18c]

i was thinking about the guy that "baits" leos by open carrying and it made me think, isn't that basicly a civilian doing a reverse "sting" operation? i don't have a problem when the police do legal sting operations so why should we get huffy about a regular person doing the same thing to help inform people? though in my opinion the best thing you could do is to completely comply with the officers even if they are abusing your rights then sue the crap out of whoever you can. when people are walking around open carrying and also having an audio recorder in their pocket then that's pretty pathetic, and not the person with the recorder but it's pathetic that they actually have to carry these recorders "just in case" they run into an officer of the law that doesn't know the law. how can one inforce something they don't know? fortunatly there ARE alot o good cops out there, but a "bad" cop is obviously alot more dangerous than just about anyone else that's "bad" at their job so they should be reprimanded or punished acordingly.

Hit the nail on the head. Exactly what I was about to say.
A civilian open carrying and intentionally walking by a cop (who, by the way, is also a CIVILIAN), isn't "antagonizing" them. If an officer doesn't know or understand the law and gets on the guy's ass about it, HE is in the wrong, not the guy OCing.


that reminds me of when i went to my cousins graduation from cu boulder years ago, i literally had a few people yelling curse words at me as i calmly chugged through town in my modded 06 cummins. i guess the people's republic of Boulder don't like whistling turbos and smoke belching straight pipes, though i'm sure my huge nebraska cornhusker mud flaps didn't help me much there either lol man i miss my diesel, it worked very well in making tools blaring loud annoying music roll their windows up very fast especially if they were foolish enough to stop next to my tail pipe [ROFL1]

Makes me miss my old diesel. Current one burns too damn clean, won't smoke at all. Some asshat in a convertible Mini with the top down thought he could get away with cutting off the big slow truck... little did he realize the big slow truck was actually built for racing and was pushing almost 700hp and 1200lbft, and of course paid no mind to the tailpipe being level with his head (6" lift on 37s). Big truck passes him in the blink of an eye, and he must have turned onto a side street cause there was no more Mini when the smoke cleared in the rear view [Tooth]
Now those guys that go dump smoke on anybody and everybody just cause they can are douchebags. There are times when its justified though....
Bought that truck in the People's Rep. of Boulder... driving home I was cussed at, fake-coughed at and flipped off, etc.

[colocowboy01]

Very interesting story, I am sure we don't have all the facts [Tooth].

[streetglideok]

Responding to streetglide's post. Speaking for myself only- I don't recall ever feeling nervous around coppers, unless I was doing something wrong. It may sound stupid, but they're gonna have to beat up a lot more innocents before that happens. I have always felt that cops were my friends, and I have the same to desire to give them a "thumbs up" as I would a combat veteran.

As a rule, I dont get nervous around law enforcement. Ive dealt with everything from barne fife's to state, to DOT, to Border patrol, to Customs. Even Canadian LEO. Nearly all of them hae been professional in their manner, and I gave them much respect in return. A couple were on power trips, but that was it. Now there was one state boy in Oklahoma that liked cruising around with his radar gun locked at 81mph and patrolled a 65 speed zone. He would randomly pull people over and try to shake them up or something. He got me once. After a little chat with him, he let me off. About 6 months later, he was on the news, hehehe. This is also the state with the trooper who roughed up an EMT.

[Jer]

I hate being so litigious, but I feel like this guy could bring suit against the city, and in turn bring attention to his case.

Having a firearm pointed at you, being insulted (if in public), being taken down, etc. all with no lawful reason or lawful suspicion seem like reasons enough to bring a very reasonable suit.

Might at least make all his new legal trouble more affordable. [Tooth]

This.

I hate when people sue over frivolous things but this is a prime example where I hope the guy does. If he doesn't, it gets swept under the rug and nothing changes. If he does then he probably can call himself millionaire and more importantly it calls heat to a dept that clearly deserves it. Based on the evidence given I have a hard time believing this is the first incident for this officer and it certainly won't be the last if nothing is done.

I'm continually amazed at how many people do such a bad job at doing their job in this economy. VERY good people are lined up looking for ANY work and I can't get good customer service at a Subway? That guy is a liability to the dept and should be let go and replaced by someone who would be honored to do his job the way it was intended to be performed.

[Colorado Luckydog]

They only get caught every now and then. This sort of thing goes on all the time. Go to opencarry.org and you will see a lot of guys that carry open, carry a recorder.

These cops and a ton of other cops believe they are the law and you need to obey everything they say, or else.

[Lex_Luthor]

I saw a guy OC'ing at King Soopers the other day. Kind of a refreshing sight for me. Seemed that everything was going peacefully.

[Delfuego]

Just the looks I get from people when I'm in Denver in my Dodge MegaCab dually on mud tires is enough to make me feel really uncomfortable.
Its not Open-Carry, its your TEXAS Plates Bro.....[DriveBy]

[Colorado Luckydog]

I think the situation could have been handled better by the LEO's. On the other hand open carrying is just asking for trouble.


Why would you consider that carrying a gun perfectly legal would be asking for trouble? I'm sure you didn't mean to but you sound like one of "THEM".

You think if we exercise our rights, that we are asking for trouble? I got news for you, "USE YOUR RIGHTS OR LOSE THEM". I'm not saying that everyone should carry open but if they take away that right, it's just another piece of our rights that they are chipping away at and they are not going to stop.

[MED]

If you are dealing with an LEO, the best thing to do is whatever he/she asks. This is the best rule even if the LEO is wrong. If the situation is escalated by perceived non-compliance, the officer immediately goes into survival mode…anything can happen after that. In this situation, the young man should have complied, not argued his position, and then called his attorney when it was all over. If he would have followed these steps, he would have a case against the department instead of going to a hearing in July.

NEVER escalate a situation!!!

I am not defending the ignorance of the LEO, but the officer, wrong or not, confronted an armed man. A little understanding of the situation goes a long way. The LEO was not going to listen for one second while the person he was confronting had a firearm.

[Jer]

If you are dealing with an LEO, the best thing to do is whatever he/she asks. This is the best rule even if the LEO is wrong. If the situation is escalated by perceived non-compliance, the officer immediately goes into survival mode…anything can happen after that. In this situation, the young man should have complied, not argued his position, and then called his attorney when it was all over. If he would have followed these steps, he would have a case against the department instead of going to a hearing in July.

NEVER escalate a situation!!!

I am not defending the ignorance of the LEO, but the officer, wrong or not, confronted an armed man. A little understanding of the situation goes a long way. The LEO was not going to listen for one second while the person he was confronting had a firearm.

This seems like troll bait but I'll bite....

There's a flip side to that coin. Why did he contact the individual? What PC did he have to present his firearm and order the man to his knees in public? The guy doesn't know this guy from Adam and he's being ordered to do things at gunpoint and he hasn't done anything wrong. How does he know this guy is even a cop at this point? Don't forget that this guy is now in survival mode as well but of the two individuals in this situation only one of them made the choice to be put in that situation by his actions. Just because someone has a badge (assuming it's legit) free, law abiding citizens are supposed to do whatever they say at any and all times even if there's no reason behind it? That doesn't sound like a free society to me. I'm not a fan of open carry where CC is legal for my own reasons which vary but the last thing one should have to worry about if they legally open carry is an officer of the law.

Does a LEO have the same 'right' to pull over ANY and ALL cars and order the driver out and onto the ground at gunpoint even if they've done nothing wrong? How is this situation different? A car is just as dangerous as a gun (stats would argue more so actually) and if neither is being used in an unlawful manner then how does anyone sworn to protect and server have the right to do anything to that individual? What's next.. no carrying hammers or nail guns in public? Are we going to have stakeouts of Home Depot and Lowe's parking lots?

This idea that all of our rights need to be compromised for the alleged increase in officer safety is horseshit. I have lots of really good friends who are in LE and while I do care about them I'm not going to live in a locked down society so they can feel a little more safe.

Life is inherently dangerous. If you're alive you're in danger. Be thankful you're in danger because the alternative sucks.

[Byte Stryke]

This seems like troll bait but I'll bite....

There's a flip side to that coin. Why did he contact the individual? What PC did he have to present his firearm and order the man to his knees in public? The guy doesn't know this guy from Adam and he's being ordered to do things at gunpoint and he hasn't done anything wrong. How does he know this guy is even a cop at this point? Don't forget that this guy is now in survival mode as well but of the two individuals in this situation only one of them made the choice to be put in that situation by his actions. Just because someone has a badge (assuming it's legit) free, law abiding citizens are supposed to do whatever they say at any and all times even if there's no reason behind it? That doesn't sound like a free society to me. I'm not a fan of open carry where CC is legal for my own reasons which vary but the last thing one should have to worry about if they legally open carry is an officer of the law.

Does a LEO have the same 'right' to pull over ANY and ALL cars and order the driver out and onto the ground at gunpoint even if they've done nothing wrong? How is this situation different? A car is just as dangerous as a gun (stats would argue more so actually) and if neither is being used in an unlawful manner then how does anyone sworn to protect and server have the right to do anything to that individual? What's next.. no carrying hammers or nail guns in public? Are we going to have stakeouts of Home Depot and Lowe's parking lots?

This idea that all of our rights need to be compromised for the alleged increase in officer safety is horseshit. I have lots of really good friends who are in LE and while I do care about them I'm not going to live in a locked down society so they can feel a little more safe.

Life is inherently dangerous. If you're alive you're in danger. Be thankful you're in danger because the alternative sucks.


well said

[Colorado Luckydog]

well said

X2 Good post.

This very story is why I will not open carry when I'm with my family. I do not under estimate the stupidity capabilities of some LEO's. I will open carry when I'm by myself because I think it needs to be done. All of my neighbors know I'm a good guy and they are used to seeing me carry a gun everyday in some form or another. People need to understand that most firearm owners are neither LEO's or bad guys. The very biggest precentage of firearm owners are just everyday folks like themselves.

[Elhuero]

Good luck Elhuero- I'll still vote for you even if a video of you comes up on 9News!


[Awesom]

[Clint45]

Some cops are terrified of the thought that civilians carry guns. You don't see that mentality here in Colorado, but in the NorthEast, particularly the cites, it is pretty much the norm. In a few of those states, this guy would have been prosecuted for felony eavesdropping charges for recording this.

[Dusty Johnson]

Why would you consider that carrying a gun perfectly legal would be asking for trouble? I'm sure you didn't mean to but you sound like one of "THEM".

You think if we exercise our rights, that we are asking for trouble? I got news for you, "USE YOUR RIGHTS OR LOSE THEM". I'm not saying that everyone should carry open but if they take away that right, it's just another piece of our rights that they are chipping away at and they are not going to stop.

It's obvious not every LEO knows every single law top to bottom. That being right or wrong is a different topic in itself.

So being that we know not every LEO knows every law in and out in my opinion open carrying legal or not is provoking a LEO and asking for trouble.

[Colorado Luckydog]

It's obvious not every LEO knows every single law top to bottom. That being right or wrong is a different topic in itself.

So being that we know not every LEO knows every law in and out in my opinion open carrying legal or not is provoking a LEO and asking for trouble.

You have a right to your opinion, no matter how wrong it may be.

[KevDen2005]

It's obvious not every LEO knows every single law top to bottom. That being right or wrong is a different topic in itself.

So being that we know not every LEO knows every law in and out in my opinion open carrying legal or not is provoking a LEO and asking for trouble.


All I have told my friend that want to open carry is know every law surrounding this issue verbatim. Once you start quoting CRS, they will probably leave you alone. And of course, knowing them means following them too I suppose.

[Irving]

Unless they prone you out and arrest you instead. :)

[KevDen2005]

Unless they prone you out and arrest you instead. :)


And there is always that...

[Outlaw1]

Its not Open-Carry, its your TEXAS Plates Bro.....[DriveBy]

I think you're on to something. Everywhere I go someone makes a comment about my accent or my use of 'ma'am' & 'sir'.

[Byte Stryke]

It's obvious not every LEO knows every single law top to bottom. That being right or wrong is a different topic in itself.

So being that we know not every LEO knows every law in and out in my opinion open carrying legal or not is provoking a LEO and asking for trouble.


I agree... all cops wont know every law and every statute for their jurisdiction.

but I have to say that if they dont know the U.S. Constitution, it's allot like an electrician asking "Whats an Amp?"

[stevelkinevil]

If it is the same guy and they prove that he was deliberately antogonizing then the disorderly might stick.

Other than that, I think the cops were out of line and it pisses me off that that we share the same profession, when these guys don't know the laws in their city.

But, the recorder thing not only fishy to me, but also just has audio, no visual, so I don't want to put too much into what the cops did or did not do and the same with the guy that was open carrying, we just can't see his actions so I am not going to jump to too many conclusions.

I as a former LEO understand why you would find the presence of a recorder running pre-incident "fishy" HOWEVER if this recording did not exist, no one, and I mean no one, would take his claims seriously. And the officers actions are clearly criminal and even worse un-apologetic. Couple that with the DA now scrounging for a way to CYA for the city and this is a clear case of violation of rights. We have been brain washed into thinking "rights" are something used exclusively by criminals to elude prosecution for crimes they openly committed, however this is not TV and many times daily citizens who have not broken any laws are treated as convicted criminals by the very people employed to assist them.

[cms81586]

I as a former LEO understand why you would find the presence of a recorder running pre-incident "fishy" HOWEVER if this recording did not exist, no one, and I mean no one, would take his claims seriously. And the officers actions are clearly criminal and even worse un-apologetic. Couple that with the DA now scrounging for a way to CYA for the city and this is a clear case of violation of rights. We have been brain washed into thinking "rights" are something used exclusively by criminals to elude prosecution for crimes they openly committed, however this is not TV and many times daily citizens who have not broken any laws are treated as convicted criminals by the very people employed to assist them.


As a former PA resident who always will call the state my home. Philly is the one place we'd like to give to New Jersey....but even they won't take that dump. The rest of PA isn't like that, and while I dont' OC, PA's very good about it. I have friends in the State Police and they are all very informed on OC laws. Philly tries to do thier own thing.

CMS

[oinco]

A quick look a (http://www.phillypolice.com/about/mission-statement)t the Philly PD mission statement should speak volumes as to why this happened..... who the f*&! are "others"? BradyBillers? Kangaroos? Autocrats?

I cannot expect an officer of any capacity to know every law....I don't even know all the laws pertaining to things that I really care about-but I can/do look them up. Pretty fast.
Seems that should be the professional directive vs. what happened here.

I am intrigued by the thought that OCarry should be a duty we have as "free" civilians. Inaction is submission?

How do we take something positive away from this and similar instances to help protect our constitutional rights?

Maybe we should hire gay&lesbian lobbyists/ organizers/campaigners to help us change current social and political views on guns/OCarry/etc. ? They got their sh*t done! (pun partially intended) they have been sooo successful in getting special treatment/rights and changing the way our culture looks at their practices in so many ways. That shift didn't happen by people "staying in their closets".

I guess I am going to have to "come out of my gun-closet" and ocarry? is ccw enough?

[KevDen2005]

I as a former LEO understand why you would find the presence of a recorder running pre-incident "fishy" HOWEVER if this recording did not exist, no one, and I mean no one, would take his claims seriously. And the officers actions are clearly criminal and even worse un-apologetic. Couple that with the DA now scrounging for a way to CYA for the city and this is a clear case of violation of rights. We have been brain washed into thinking "rights" are something used exclusively by criminals to elude prosecution for crimes they openly committed, however this is not TV and many times daily citizens who have not broken any laws are treated as convicted criminals by the very people employed to assist them.


I am certainly not disputing the importance of the recorder. I often carry a recorder myself. However, I don't leave it running indefinitely. My fishy-ness comment is in reference to the fact that is was running, so my thought is the contact by the police department is not a surprise. I am not suggesting that it's bad that he had the recorder. I am certainly an advocate of getting rid of police officers that don't belong in the profession. My concern is this armed guy possibly provoking the police that don't know the law. If the police kill the guy, whether right or wrong, at the end of the day does the moron with the recorder care? Not anymore. And if police officers like that are shooting innocent civilians I can only assume that they are also endangering the lives of the other people in the public setting. Just this year, a Baltimore Officer was killed by fellow police officers. I don't know the full circumstances of the situation, but cops saw guy with gun (the undercover police officer) and killed him. Does this scare me as a cop that I might need my gun off duty? YES!

[Byte Stryke]

I am certainly not disputing the importance of the recorder. I often carry a recorder myself. However, I don't leave it running indefinitely. My fishy-ness comment is in reference to the fact that is was running, so my thought is the contact by the police department is not a surprise. I am not suggesting that it's bad that he had the recorder. I am certainly an advocate of getting rid of police officers that don't belong in the profession. My concern is this armed guy possibly provoking the police that don't know the law. If the police kill the guy, whether right or wrong, at the end of the day does the moron with the recorder care? Not anymore. And if police officers like that are shooting innocent civilians I can only assume that they are also endangering the lives of the other people in the public setting. Just this year, a Baltimore Officer was killed by fellow police officers. I don't know the full circumstances of the situation, but cops saw guy with gun (the undercover police officer) and killed him. Does this scare me as a cop that I might need my gun off duty? YES!



[Eek3]

Kev... I am shocked
I did not figure you one for premature judgement.

whether right or wrong, at the end of the day does the CITIZEN with the recorder care?

I also carry a digital recorder and you can bet I will turn it on if I even suspect I am going to be contacted by PD... especially Saudi-Aurora PD or The Denver Blue Gang Because, Just as Gang Banger attire marks a predisposition for a suspect... those shoulder patches do too.

It falls to the departments and each and every officer to force each other to become better public servants.
you aren't "Cops"
you aren't "Law enforcement officers"
you are supposed to be public servants, and when the public loses faith, you (as a whole) have failed.

I am seriously waiting for a city or township to get fed up with the council selected "enforcement team" and vote out the entire council and their boys in blue with them.
Just my 2 cents

[KevDen2005]

[Eek3]

Kev... I am shocked
I did not figure you one for premature judgement.


I also carry a digital recorder and you can bet I will turn it on if I even suspect I am going to be contacted by PD... especially Saudi-Aurora PD or The Denver Blue Gang Because, Just as Gang Banger attire marks a predisposition for a suspect... those shoulder patches do too.

It falls to the departments and each and every officer to force each other to become better public servants.
you aren't "Cops"
you aren't "Law enforcement officers"
you are supposed to be public servants, and when the public loses faith, you (as a whole) have failed.

I am seriously waiting for a city or township to get fed up with the council selected "enforcement team" and vote out the entire council and their boys in blue with them.
Just my 2 cents


I am not intending to judge prematurely, I am suggesting something about safety. As a cop I am not disputing the fact that there are untrained and unprofessional police officers. I am also not suggesting to not record. In fact I encourage it. I do it all the time. My question is, does this guy record non-stop or was it planned to antagonize the police? If that was his goal and he ends up getting shot by the untrained or unprofessional police I would say he made a very important statement, but does the dead man care? I am just saying, yes, lets get rid of the shitty cops, but lets not get ourselves hurt in the process, or our families or other bystanders...that is all I am saying.

[OneGuy67]

you aren't "Cops"
you aren't "Law enforcement officers"
you are supposed to be public servants, and when the public loses faith, you (as a whole) have failed.

Oh, Byte....seriously, I've got to get you out one night and get you drunk. Maybe we can work through some of this angst you got against the po-po.

However, according to Colorado Statute (I know you hate when I do this [Tooth]), we are actually 'Peace Officers', but the language also allows 'Law Enforcement Officers'.

'Cop' is just a slang term that stuck around. There are a few historical aspects to 'cop'. One is, it is an acronym of 'Citizens On Patrol'. Another is, the long coats worn at the turn of the century by officers had copper buttons down them and they were referred to as 'Coppers'.

So, if I ever get the chance to buy you that beer, I would ask you what exactly you think we as 'peace officers', 'law enforcement officers' or just plain 'cops' are supposed to be doing that we aren't doing in your opinion, because you've made it pretty clear in the past few months we aren't doing what you feel we need to do by your standards.[Police]

[B]16-2.5-101. Peace officer - description - general authority. (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=421a5774.505d0758.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2716-2.5-101%27%5D)

(1) A person who is included within the provisions of this article and who meets all standards imposed by law on a peace officer is a peace officer, and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person other than a person designated in this article is a peace officer. A peace officer may be certified by the peace officers standards and training board pursuant to part 3 of article 31 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=t.%2024,%20art.%2031&sid=421a5774.505d0758.0.0#JD_t24art31) of title 24 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=t.%2024&sid=421a5774.505d0758.0.0#JD_t24), C.R.S., and, at a minimum, has the authority to enforce all laws of the state of Colorado while acting within the scope of his or her authority and in the performance of his or her duties, unless otherwise limited within this part 1.
(2) A peace officer certified by the peace officers standards and training board shall have the authority to carry firearms at all times, concealed or otherwise, subject to the written firearms policy created by the agency employing the peace officer. All other peace officers shall have the authority to carry firearms, concealed or otherwise, while engaged in the performance of their duties or as otherwise authorized by the written policy of the agency employing the officer.
(3) As used in every statute, unless the context otherwise requires, "law enforcement officer" means a peace officer.

[Clint45]

On another note, he kept insisting I sign the speeding ticket as 'guilty'. When I asked about my options he got pretty pissed at me and insured me he would appear in court. Last week I called their courthouse to set up a court date and the person I spoke with said the judge won't give anyone defensive driving or deferred adjudication that was going 10mph over the speed limit and the officer claimed I was doing 21mph OVER the speed limit. In the last 21 years I've only had one speeding ticket. I just find it odd that a judge won't offer some kind of bargaining. So, if you know of any traffic lawyers that practice in Raton, please let me know. :)

A few things seem really odd about this. I've had a number of speeding tickets over the past few decades and I never heard of anything like what you're saying here.

Maybe there was some miscommunication, but a traffic citation is a summons. If the officer wants you to sign something it is to acknowledge receipt. In some jurisdictions they will arrest you for refusing to sign, as you are refusing to acknowledge receipt of the ticket. This is NEVER an acknowledgement of guilt. Now, there is a place on the back of the ticket that you can sign to plead guilty and pay by mail so you do not need to bother showing up in court. A lot of out of state people do that. The officer should not pressure you to sign that in his presence. He should not pressure you to sign it after the fact. He can and should let you know you have the option to sign it if you wish.

Judge makes the final decision, but if you go to court you'll be talking to the DA. If you have a clean driving record, DA will most likely offer you a plea bargain to a 2 point infraction instead of a speed/reckless. Fine will be the same, but less points on your license and it will look better on your driving record which affects your insurance rates. You shouldn't have to take classes unless they yank your license, which should not happen and probably won't.

[KevDen2005]

Oh, Byte....seriously, I've got to get you out one night and get you drunk. Maybe we can work through some of this angst you got against the po-po.

However, according to Colorado Statute (I know you hate when I do this [Tooth]), we are actually 'Peace Officers', but the language also allows 'Law Enforcement Officers'.

'Cop' is just a slang term that stuck around. There are a few historical aspects to 'cop'. One is, it is an acronym of 'Citizens On Patrol'. Another is, the long coats worn at the turn of the century by officers had copper buttons down them and they were referred to as 'Coppers'.

So, if I ever get the chance to buy you that beer, I would ask you what exactly you think we as 'peace officers', 'law enforcement officers' or just plain 'cops' are supposed to be doing that we aren't doing in your opinion, because you've made it pretty clear in the past few months we aren't doing what you feel we need to do by your standards.[Police]

[B]16-2.5-101. Peace officer - description - general authority. (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=421a5774.505d0758.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2716-2.5-101%27%5D)

(1) A person who is included within the provisions of this article and who meets all standards imposed by law on a peace officer is a peace officer, and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person other than a person designated in this article is a peace officer. A peace officer may be certified by the peace officers standards and training board pursuant to part 3 of article 31 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=t.%2024,%20art.%2031&sid=421a5774.505d0758.0.0#JD_t24art31) of title 24 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=t.%2024&sid=421a5774.505d0758.0.0#JD_t24), C.R.S., and, at a minimum, has the authority to enforce all laws of the state of Colorado while acting within the scope of his or her authority and in the performance of his or her duties, unless otherwise limited within this part 1.
(2) A peace officer certified by the peace officers standards and training board shall have the authority to carry firearms at all times, concealed or otherwise, subject to the written firearms policy created by the agency employing the peace officer. All other peace officers shall have the authority to carry firearms, concealed or otherwise, while engaged in the performance of their duties or as otherwise authorized by the written policy of the agency employing the officer.
(3) As used in every statute, unless the context otherwise requires, "law enforcement officer" means a peace officer.


I am down for that too...I say we get together over beers

[Byte Stryke]

I am not intending to judge prematurely, I am suggesting something about safety. As a cop I am not disputing the fact that there are untrained and unprofessional police officers. I am also not suggesting to not record. In fact I encourage it. I do it all the time. My question is, does this guy record non-stop or was it planned to antagonize the police? If that was his goal and he ends up getting shot by the untrained or unprofessional police I would say he made a very important statement, but does the dead man care? I am just saying, yes, lets get rid of the shitty cops, but lets not get ourselves hurt in the process, or our families or other bystanders...that is all I am saying.

I have tried really hard not to use this as it sounds so cliche
"I would rather die on my feet that to live on my knees."

Meaning, in this case, I would rather go about my business and do my thing within my rights and Hold the public servants accountable than to bend to the whims and desires of someone wanting to unlawfully deny me of my rights; even for a little bit.

and again, if I was in OC in an area notorious for "issues" I would walk around with my finger on the record button and press it every time I saw a blue suit.


Oh, Byte....seriously, I've got to get you out one night and get you drunk. Maybe we can work through some of this angst you got against the po-po.

However, according to Colorado Statute (I know you hate when I do this [Tooth]), we are actually 'Peace Officers', but the language also allows 'Law Enforcement Officers'.

'Cop' is just a slang term that stuck around. There are a few historical aspects to 'cop'. One is, it is an acronym of 'Citizens On Patrol'. Another is, the long coats worn at the turn of the century by officers had copper buttons down them and they were referred to as 'Coppers'.

So, if I ever get the chance to buy you that beer, I would ask you what exactly you think we as 'peace officers', 'law enforcement officers' or just plain 'cops' are supposed to be doing that we aren't doing in your opinion, because you've made it pretty clear in the past few months we aren't doing what you feel we need to do by your standards.[Police]

[B]16-2.5-101. Peace officer - description - general authority. (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=421a5774.505d0758.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2716-2.5-101%27%5D)

(1) A person who is included within the provisions of this article and who meets all standards imposed by law on a peace officer is a peace officer, and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person other than a person designated in this article is a peace officer. A peace officer may be certified by the peace officers standards and training board pursuant to part 3 of article 31 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=t.%2024,%20art.%2031&sid=421a5774.505d0758.0.0#JD_t24art31) of title 24 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=t.%2024&sid=421a5774.505d0758.0.0#JD_t24), C.R.S., and, at a minimum, has the authority to enforce all laws of the state of Colorado while acting within the scope of his or her authority and in the performance of his or her duties, unless otherwise limited within this part 1.
(2) A peace officer certified by the peace officers standards and training board shall have the authority to carry firearms at all times, concealed or otherwise, subject to the written firearms policy created by the agency employing the peace officer. All other peace officers shall have the authority to carry firearms, concealed or otherwise, while engaged in the performance of their duties or as otherwise authorized by the written policy of the agency employing the officer.
(3) As used in every statute, unless the context otherwise requires, "law enforcement officer" means a peace officer.


I am down for that too...I say we get together over beers


Semantics... the police are supposed to be there to protect and serve the people, you know "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?". More and more they are there to protect and serve the interests of the city council and their budgets.


as far as what I think the Police are supposed to do?
Lets start with not denying constitutional rights?.. Perhaps throw in some "Don't beat an old man's ass for trying to help save lives by taking a dangerous driver off of the road."
Finish it all up with some reality check of "if you are found guilty of a crime while on duty, You get prison sex, NOT a Paid vacation on my goddamned tax dollars."

How is it there are people Bitching about privately funded (NOT Tax dollars) UIC. but if someone commits felony assault with a deadly weapon (I am pretty sure the cop had a Gun at the time) they get a paid vacation because they have a badge?
Admit it, If I was OC and beat someones ass, even if I did not use the weapon, That would be the charge.
I would immediately be jailed.
I would lose my job.

I would not receive a paid vacation pending the investigation.

as far as the beer, I don't have bail money, I cannot find an attorney and a camera crew willing to tape the evidence that night. ;)

[Lex_Luthor]

and again, if I was in OC in an area notorious for "issues" I would walk around with my finger on the record button and press it every time I saw a blue suit.


This was my thought. I would imagine if the was OC and came within distance of officers, he would have pressed record as precaution. More than likely, he might have expected not to have any issues, or be sent on his way. But probably had it recording just in case. And good thing he did.

[Zundfolge]

Whenever these stories come up I have to wonder why none of these overzealous police officers are ever charged with a felony under federal law.


TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I--CRIMES

CHAPTER 13--CIVIL RIGHTS

Sec. 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Maybe some of you legal beagles out there can tell me why.

[Jer]

For those wondering there are LOTs of apps these days that make it VERY easy to record audio with the single press of a key. It's not a bad idea and if I ever get pulled over or otherwise contacted by a police officer I will sure as shit record my interaction as well. It's easy to delete it afterward if all goes well which is more than likely but like any job if you know you're on camera you're more likely to behave. I also record phone conversations and keep the important ones and it's come in handy numerous times already. There' s some shady business owners these days.

[Byte Stryke]

Whenever these stories come up I have to wonder why none of these overzealous police officers are ever charged with a felony under federal law.

Originally Posted by US CODE-Title 18-Part I-Chapter 13 § 242
TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I--CRIMES

CHAPTER 13--CIVIL RIGHTS

Sec. 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.



Maybe some of you legal beagles out there can tell me why.


Because the DA is in the same Gang... DUH

[Zundfolge]

Because the DA is in the same Gang... DUH
Well yeah, that's the glib cyincal reason ... but I was wondering if anyone was aware of any case law regarding this federal law and has it ever been used (I suspect it was one of those laws written to keep racist white cops from beating down black folk, but I dunno).

[rondog]

So we all seem to agree there's too many guys like this one, they're a problem, and they need to go. How do we do that?

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b150/rinselman/funnies/cops.jpg

[Pancho Villa]

I forget the name of the legal concept exactly, something to do with immunity, but the basics are pretty simple: people cannot be held personally liable for actions they do in the execution of government business.

That is why its almost impossible to sue a police officer personally for his own misconduct, and why instead people have to sue the department/city that hired him. That's hardly a deterrent to individual action.

Anyway, a cop might get fired for what he does, but he has to act crazy far outside the bounds of what is reasonable to ever even appear in court (think Rodney King beatings and the Rampart scandals, neither of which actually got anyone any jail time if I recall.)

[Zundfolge]

I did find a couple things on the law I quoted above.

Here's the FBI's page on the law. (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/color_of_law)

And here's one officer that apparently was convicted under the statute (http://articles.cnn.com/2011-03-31/justice/louisiana.katrina.sentencings_1_police-officers-police-station-federal-court?_s=PM:CRIME)(I found a couple others too but the only times it appears that officers get charged are if someone dies or in several cases of prison guards sexually assaulting prisoners).

So my guess is that the reason guys like those Philly cops don't get slapped with this is that it takes a lot of effort on the part of the victim (at least based on what I read on the FBI page).

[Byte Stryke]

If its you or me "Suspicion" is enough.

to get the FBI to move it takes a pile of Bodies, 14 news reports with video from 6 different viewpoints and a mob of witnesses bordering riot.


or I could just be jaded
[ROFL1]

[Bluerooster114]

There is a forum thread on officer.com (http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?165349-Philly-Police-and-a-voice-recorder...-Thoughts) that has some PA officers views and references/links to Mark Fiorinos other law enforcement encounters. I found it interesting.

[cstone]

Google "Bivens Action"

Also see: mal, mis, and non feasance.

Cops can and do go to jail. They can lose their job even if they aren't charged or convicted. They can be sued personally for actions they perform while on duty. Most importantly, when you take someone's life, even if it is legally justified and you had no other choice, your life will never be the same again. This is not meant to be an excuse for bad behavior. Those who are given great authority must live with that responsibility and deal with the consequences. No one is forced to work in law enforcement and it is not the right job for everyone.

If you think you can do it better, there are plenty of departments taking applications. Good luck with the process. Its long and tedious but some of us have found it to be a rewarding career choice and we appreciate the opportunity to serve our fellow human beings. [Coffee]