Am I Free to Stay?

[Deanimator]

not only do I have better things to do, but I have never met a cop in my entire life who would give a second look to someone reading a gun magazine.

I'll bet you've never met a cop who's done a lot of things that I could provide 100% veriable examples of. I'll bet you have better things to do than beat people handcuffed to wheelchairs too. You've probably never met a cop that did it. It's still happened.

There are places in this country where absolutely NOTHING is off the table when it comes to police encounters. That's a fact; you don't have to like it.

I must unfortunately make infrequent trips to one of those places. Given that that's the case, it's better to know beforehand what you're going to do if one of these things happens than to wing it if it does.

The government and police force of the City of Chicago are fanatically anti-gun. That's a fact. I can choose to be prepared for a plausible eventuality, or I can take the flippant advice of somebody who couldn't care less what happened to me.

Knowledge is power. Ignorance is power too, somebody ELSE'S power.

 

[Deanimator]

Based on most of the cops I know, I'd imagine if they started asking you questions based on the title of the book you were reading, they were simply interested and striking up conversation.

I'd certainly recommend assuming friendly conversational intent until and unless it was VERY clear it wasn't.

The premise is that it's UNAMBIGUOUSLY hostile and intimidating. We're not talking about normal conversation.

 

[Deanimator]

Really? A thread about what we should do IF an LEO ever hassled us about our reading material? Not that it has ever happened - but what if it did?

Or your NRA ballcap or your Glock t-shirt or whatever.

I've never been carjacked. I don't know anybody who's been carjacked. So then I shouldn't ask what I should do if carjacked, because since it hasn't happened to me... YET?

 

[Deleted member 66305]

The premise is that it's UNAMBIGUOUSLY hostile and intimidating. We're not talking about normal conversation.

I'd be inclined to ignore the hostility and react as though he were casually interested in my reading material. If he were asking direct questions, I'd give direct answers. In my experience, cops don't much care for armchair lawyers. If the cop is looking for a reason to bust you, being civil and polite will likely result in giving him no excuse, especially in sight of many witnesses. It's always better to argue these things to a judge, if it comes to that, than with the officer in the midst of a situation.

 

[Dain Bramage]

There are places in this country where absolutely NOTHING is off the table when it comes to police encounters.

Well then, you'd be screwed anyway. Be polite but firm. If it gets worse, take the beating/false arrest/whatever and hope for redress in the courts.

 

[Deanimator]

I'd be inclined to ignore the hostility and react as though he were casually interested in my reading material.

The problem with that is that I'm where I am to eat dinner or have a cup of coffee or waiting to chauffeur some distant relative around and read about belt loaders for the Vickers gun while I'm doing it, NOT entertain him. If he doesn't have a reasonable law enforcement objective, I don't want to talk to somebody hostile and discourteous to me.

 

[esq_stu]

I use expired day-glow orange "UNLOADED FIREARM(S)" tags as book marks in the novels I read when I fly. They're the perfect size.

Nothing's happened yet, but I supposed I shouldn't.

 

[MarcusWendt]

O.K., so in the given scenario, are we authorized to stare them down, use deadly force? Can we flick food at them to repell the unwanted UNAMBIGUOUSLY hostile and intimidating interaction?

I personally would just put my invisible cloak on so he couldn't see me anymore. Of course, I'm not sure if they are still CA legal.

On to more pressing questions: If you notice white powder on a cops uniform do you make to obvious donut joke or do you just assume he spilled some evidence on his shirt?

 

[Chrome]

This thread is starting to go down hill (further still).

To all those saying it would never happen, guess you've never heard of hypothetical situations where you discuss events that haven't occurred. They are not typically spoken about situations others have experienced, but to reach a consensus as a group what the issues of the experience (should it occur) might be.

To the OP, I highly doubt that would happen unless you happened to be in a school. However, I think asking "am I free to stay" would be a perfect alternative question to ask.

Later,
Chrome...

 

[rainbowbob]

I dont see what the problem is. If you dont like the scenario, dont comment on it. If you dont have something constructive to add, dont post and thread crap.

The problem is that new people checking out this forum looking for intelligent discourse on the subject of gun ownership might be incliined to think we are all a bunch of cop-bashing loons.

I've never been carjacked. I don't know anybody who's been carjacked. So then I shouldn't ask what I should do if carjacked, because since it hasn't happened to me... YET?

Not a good analogy. You haven't been carjacked - but there are plenty of well-documented incidents of car-jacking. So thinking about a tactical response to a car-jacking would not be loony.

A better analogy would be discussing the tactical response to being high-jacked by a UFO.

Show me ONE documented, varifiable incident in which a Chicago LEO (or an LEO in any other city for that matter) harrassed a citizen for what they were reading.

Otherwise, I stick by my assessment that this is the lamest, looniest thread in a long time on THR.

And it DOES matter - because we should aspire to be the voice of reason on gun issues.

 

[Deanimator]

This thread is starting to go down hill (further still).

@DEANIMATOR, guess you've never heard of hypothetical situations where you discuss events that haven't occurred. They are typically spoken about situations others have experienced, but to reach a consensus as a group what the issues of the experience might be.

To the OP, I highly doubt that would happen unless you happened to be in a school. However, I think asking "am I free to stay" would be a perfect alternative question to ask.

Later,
Chrome...

I AM the OP.

While in Chicago for the holidays, I'm frequently called upon to drive relatives around. This often involves sitting parked on side streets, waiting for people to get their stuff together. Given where some of my relatives live, it's ENTIRELY possible that I might encounter police. Some guy was shot dead, feet from my cousin's front door. Unless some of the generous people here are willing to chip in on relocation expenses (and my relatives suddenly develop enough brains to WANT to move) I don't have any choice.

 

[rainbowbob]

I AM the OP...I don't have any choice.

You may not have any choice about having to go to Chicago. But you do have a choice to spend your time and energy thinking and posting about hypothetical situations that might actually occur in the real world. I realize Chicago is probably pretty bad for gun owners - but last time I checked it was still part of the real world.

Unless you can come up with any shred of evidence that this kind of First Amendment violation has occurred even ONCE in Chicago or anywhere else - give it up!

 

[Deanimator]

Not a good analogy. You haven't been carjacked - but there are plenty of well-documented incidents of car-jacking. So thinking about a tactical response to a car-jacking would not be loony.

A better analogy would be discussing the tactical response to being high-jacked by a UFO.

It's a perfectly valid analogy. Whether it makes you uncomfortable is entirely beside the point. There are plenty of wel-documented incidents in just the last twenty four months of bad encounters with the Chicago PD. The hypothetical which I posited would be in absolutely the LEAST extreme category. The cops where you live may be fine and upstanding. The ones in the town where I live certainly appear to be, at least the detective I talked to yesterday was. But my family doesn't live in Rocky River, Ohio. They live in Chicago. If I want to see my mother before she dies, looking for her in Ohio is going to be at best a frustrating experience. When I go to Chicago, I don't get to deal with the Rocky River PD. I get to deal with the Chicago PD. If you don't think there's a difference and that an entirely different attitude and preparations are in order, that's a direct and undeserved slap in the face of the Rocky River cops.

Now unless you can show that the cops who beat the guy handcuffed to a wheelchair, who beat the barmaid, or who beat up the bond traders came off of a UFO, you're just closing your eyes, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing real loud. Reality doesn't go away because it embarasses you.

 

[Deanimator]

Unless you can come up with any shred of evidence that this kind of First Amendment violation has occurred even ONCE in Chicago or anywhere else - give it up!

Have the cops in your town ever "arrested" a painting?

I didn't think so...

 

[Chrome]

@Deanimator

Sorry, I was skimming through the posts and mistook the nature of your post. Had I noticed you were the OP, I probably wouldn't have said that! My mistake!

Later,
Chrome...

 

[Deanimator]

Sorry, I was skimming through the posts and mistook the nature of your post. Had I noticed you were the OP, I probably wouldn't have said that! My mistake!

It gets confusing sometimes. Try twelve levels of quotes in a usenet post that some anti-gun clown in Australia absolutely refuses to trim...

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

Here's a new hypothetical.

Let's say an innocent law-abiding cop is sitting down, minding his own business having lunch when some hostile, idiot, schmuck walks over and decides to ruin the poor cops day by striking up a clearly unconstitutional conversation.

Let's specify by saying the schmuck asks for the time but the cop doesn't have a watch, so the cop says, "Sorry, I don't have a watch."


Next thing you know the schmuck is screaming about how the cop is a "public servant" and should take time off from "eating donuts" so he can go get a watch. He then points at the cop and demands, under his authority as a taxpayer, that the cop drop his food, respond to the nearest Macy's and buy a watch.

What redress does the cop have? Can he beat the schmuck unconscious? Can he draw? Fire?

Can he ask the posters of thehighroad.org to, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, STOP COP BASHING FOR ONCE?

 

[rainbowbob]

It's a perfectly valid analogy. Whether it makes you uncomfortable is entirely beside the point. There are plenty of wel-documented incidents in just the last twenty four months of bad encounters with the Chicago PD.

It doesn't make me uncomfortable. It just ISN'T a good analogy. If the police were directed to confiscate a painting (as you claim) on some BS obscenity or slander beef - that isn't a good analogy either. You are going on and on about a make-believe encounter with a single police officer acting on his own to hassle you about your reading material.

Now unless you can show that the cops who beat the guy handcuffed to a wheelchair, who beat the barmaid, or who beat up the bond traders came off of a UFO, you're just closing your eyes, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing real loud. Reality doesn't go away because it embarasses you.

These are REAL incidents of abuse by LEOs. Individuals in any line of work can and do abuse their positions. That has NOTHING to do with being hassled for reading a magazine - an incident which did NOT occur anywhere but in your imagination.

Just because anything is possible - does not make it probable.

Fuming and bashing LEOs over an incident that only occurred in your imagination is loony.

I give up...Rock on with your silly thread. I only hope that a seriously interested newbie doesn't accidently stumble on it.

 

[Deanimator]

Here's a new hypothetical.

It's probably, among other things:

Disorderly conduct
Harassment
[Possibly] Menacing
[Possibly] Trespassing, depending upon whether he's asked to leave.

A cop who's not unlawfully bothering anyone should be left alone, just as you should.

I'll bet you're disappointed by that answer...

 

[Deanimator]

Just because anything is possible - does not make it probable.

What's "probable" about beating somebody handcuffed to a wheelchair? Have you ever done that? Have you ever considered it? I know I haven't. To the best of my knowledge, no Rocky River (or Berea or Fremont) cop has done that since I've lived in Ohio. That means it CAN'T happen, ANYWHERE, right?

Entirely possible things don't become impossible merely because they make you uncomfortable.

 

[jfh]

There is entirely too much mental masturbation in this thread.

Period.

How 'bout we discuss how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

Or...could someone tell me why my chrono broke today? (I didn't shoot it, either.)

Jim H.

 

[Wheeler44]

Let's specify by saying the schmuck asks for the time but the cop doesn't have a watch, so the cop says, "Sorry, I don't have a watch."

Cool, then when he testilies that such and such occurred at such and such time the counsel for defense can have the case dismissed 'cuz the cop couldn't know the time without a watch. Do I have that correct?

Rainbow, look into how many times the Seattle cops have been called in on the carpet for abusing folks 1st amendment rights.
Can't happen, indeed.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

consider the source

 

[Sage of Seattle]

Originally Posted by 209
Actually, I can see getting a call similiar to the one that started this thread.

Being as I work in an extremely anti-gun environment, I may well get a call to check on someone reading a gun magazine. Guess what? If dispatched, I'd go. I'd probably try to track down the complainant and ask what the problem is.

Ahhh, I love "refused" complainants. I'll drive up. Note on my log sheet that no criminal violation was present... back in service.

Overall this seems like another anti-authority imagination at work again on THR.

I don't get it. You just agreed with the other officer who said he can see getting a call just like the hypothetical, yet you still dismiss it as being ludicrous.

So, apparently in 209's area where he operates, it is not as far fetched as many of you think.

The problem is that new people checking out this forum looking for intelligent discourse on the subject of gun ownership might be incliined to think we are all a bunch of cop-bashing loons.

Yeah, because bashing fellow forum members who aren't police is perfectly okay and makes guests feel all warm and fuzzy.

 

[rainbowbob]

What's "probable" about beating somebody handcuffed to a wheelchair?

What's probable about it is that it actually happened.

As opposed to your "What if an LEO hassled me about what I was reading" scenario - which DIDN'T happen.

Your scenario doesn't make me uncomfortable. It's just silly.

What does make me uncomfortable is the prospect of an inquiring mind coming upon this thread and deciding that THR is a haven for silliness.