Officer gets upset with a biker legally carrying a gun...oh hell he's from Pensacola..LOL.

http://www2.jcfloridan.com/news/2012/jan/30/pensacola-man-sues-montana-deputies-over-gun-arres-ar-3141477/

Robert Pierson, of Pensacola, Fla., contends in a federal lawsuit filed
Friday in Cheyenne that he was pulled over while motorcycling through
Lincoln County in August.

things in this country are being fundamentally transformed... i don't know why people don't care. domestication i guess.

Harley FXDF Fatbob.. I know that bike well

TEOTWAWKI wrote:http://www2.jcfloridan.com/news/2012/jan/30/pensacola-man-sues-montana-deputies-over-gun-arres-ar-3141477/

Robert Pierson, of Pensacola, Fla., contends in a federal lawsuit filed
Friday in Cheyenne that he was pulled over while motorcycling through
Lincoln County in August.

I hope Robert wins. For all our sake.

That is one tough marine. Mental toughness and keeping calm in a crisis does not happen by accident. This Captain was well trained. The average person does not have his discipline. They rarely can keep their emotions under control. This marine was dead cinch correct in every position but one.......when the officer made an investigatory stop, he has every right during questioning to make sure his safety is first and foremost. When a person who is legally armed, he has every right to handcuff that suspect if the officer feels his safety is at risk. The officer was correct, but once he determined that he could not establish any law being broken, the officer could not keep him handcuffed because he was fearful the Captain would shoot him.....big bad on the officer's part.

The officer in my opinion was completely reasonable until he had enough information in his investigatory stop to realize that no law was broken and this man was not a threat to anyone. It is a fine line balancing the rights of the individual and an officer's right to be safe....the courts have consistently supported officers perceptions of risk, but 45 minutes of handcuffs is retribution and humiliation after facing a patriot who was both knowledgeable of his constitutional rights, and was not a typical mouthy wussy. This man was trained and I was impressed. The officers will be reprimanded for the length of time the rider was in handcuffs, they will not lose their jobs, and the Captain will get a nominal amount of money for the same. The system only works when patriots do just what this Captain did, but until you have been the only person on duty in a rural county and pull over somebody who is armed........do not tell the courts or the officers about your constitutional rights because the officer is going to be able to make a safe investigatory stop. period.

I always sympathize with a cop's thinking about his/her own safety. But did he have a legitimate reason to think he was in danger of the biker pulling the gun on him?

I always sympathize with a cop's thinking about his/her own safety. But did he have a legitimate reason to think he was in danger of the biker pulling the gun on him?

Yes, he did. The United States Supreme Court has consistently allowed "reasonable" investigatory stops, and depending on training and Department protocols, a person who does not disclose a weapon, can be temporarily detained while the officer completes his investigation. It is a subjective officer appraisal of the risks......it is not unlimited as to time, and risk. This will be reviewed by the courts and they will find the handcuffing completely consistent with a investigatory stop, but clearly this Marine showed no objective criteria of a threat, but more importantly there is no basis to detain this Marine because there was no reasonable suspicion or probable cause. As to length of time, and intent, the department will be paying damages, but no department in America is going to discipline an officer who handcuffs a suspect during an investigatory stop simply because the officer feels unsafe.....The Marine served his country, but he would not expect any person under his command to take unnecessary risks. The burden of a short investigatory stop does not lose its benefits because a Citizen has constitutional rights.....yep....we all do.....but the supreme court makes that decision.....not a Marine Captain, nor Seaoat, and they consistently allow investigatory stops which can detain a person temporarily.

Well, we shall see.

Lurch wrote:Harley FXDF Fatbob.. I know that bike well

Myself as well...

2seaoat wrote:That is one tough marine. Mental toughness and keeping calm in a crisis does not happen by accident. This Captain was well trained. The average person does not have his discipline. They rarely can keep their emotions under control. This marine was dead cinch correct in every position but one.......when the officer made an investigatory stop, he has every right during questioning to make sure his safety is first and foremost. When a person who is legally armed, he has every right to handcuff that suspect if the officer feels his safety is at risk. The officer was correct, but once he determined that he could not establish any law being broken, the officer could not keep him handcuffed because he was fearful the Captain would shoot him.....big bad on the officer's part.

The officer in my opinion was completely reasonable until he had enough information in his investigatory stop to realize that no law was broken and this man was not a threat to anyone. It is a fine line balancing the rights of the individual and an officer's right to be safe....the courts have consistently supported officers perceptions of risk, but 45 minutes of handcuffs is retribution and humiliation after facing a patriot who was both knowledgeable of his constitutional rights, and was not a typical mouthy wussy. This man was trained and I was impressed. The officers will be reprimanded for the length of time the rider was in handcuffs, they will not lose their jobs, and the Captain will get a nominal amount of money for the same. The system only works when patriots do just what this Captain did, but until you have been the only person on duty in a rural county and pull over somebody who is armed........do not tell the courts or the officers about your constitutional rights because the officer is going to be able to make a safe investigatory stop. period.

Good point SO. I have only been pulled over once since I got my CCWL and that was up close to Jackson MS. When the MHP officer walked up to the car, I immediately informed him that I was armed. He calmly ask me to exit the vehicle, keeping both hands in plain sight. After I got out, he asked where the gun was located, I told him, he retrieved it, made it a safe weapon, laid the gun and the magazine on the roof of my car and then we went about the business of why he pulled me over in the first place. All of this took approximately 10 minutes with no handcuffs involved.

He did thank me for informing him that I was armed and did not even write me a ticket, just told me to slow it down a bit and have a safe trip.

You did it right. Now once the gun was safely on top of the car and you had been cooperative, the officer would need to have a reasonable suspicion of you breaking a law, or that he was at risk to continue an investigatory stop which involves handcuffs. My best man's father was a police officer who was gunned down by someone who he never saw it coming as he walked into a business which was in the process of being robbed. You used your brain and understood the lay of the land. I am not saying the Captain was wrong at anytime during his conversation with the officer, but clearly he caused the officer to take his time in releasing the Captain.......and this was clearly wrong. I wish this Captain and men like him could walk the streets of America today, and see how some of the Supreme Court guidelines are being abused. It is time to use common sense. The officer knew he had stepped in some poopoo when he found out he was dealing with a seasoned military officer.....I knew the same just listening to him and the cadence of his response and quickness to respond with respect but firmness as to his rights.