Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 3 votes

How to deal with cops under any circumstance


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#61    spartan max2

spartan max2

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,585 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

  • There's nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough

Posted 11 July 2013 - 11:12 AM

People don't realize that the whole reason we have the right to remain silent is to protect innocent people from getting charged with something.  Look in to it people, that's why it was created.

" I imagine that the intellegent people are the ones so intellegent that they dont even need or want to look "intellegent" anymore".
Criss Jami

#62    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 13,976 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 11 July 2013 - 11:16 AM

I don't see where explaining things to the cops gets you into nearly as much trouble as not explaining them, unless, of course, you are guilty


#63    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Humble Servent

  • Member
  • 10,826 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Parts Unknown

Posted 11 July 2013 - 11:17 AM

View PostThe world needs you, on 11 July 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

Was not the first time he spoke in front of the city council. Five days before his arrest he was there too attempting to tell the city council to pass a resolution and for them to send it, "to several authorities, including President Barack Obama, Texas senators and congressmen, and Gov. Rick Perry." [link]

Unsure how "greatness" can be attributed to any of his speeches which seem to be unrealistic exercises in demand.

Even The Blaze has asked, "Is CJ Grisham just unlucky with the law or is he a PR hound looking for an axe to grind?"

Arrested vet may have had an axe to grind



http://www.theblaze....n-axe-to-grind/

Is it likely the judge in this current case will take into account his behavior? Or the negative blogging he made toward city councilpersons when they failed to heed to his demands?


Regarding the arrest and why it was legal including the disarming and confiscation of his weapons

What he failed to realize is that even if one has a "right to carry a rifle around" in Texas they also have to listen to officer's orders when an officer is on official duties. Failure to do so is interference with public duties.
  • The arresting officer was on a legitimate call, on official duties, responding to a concerned citizen informing dispatch that a man was walking with a rifle.
  • The exact call he was on was to investigate a violation of Texas Penal Code Section 42.01 DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly: (8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm;
  • The officer had every right to disarm the invidivual during the course of the investigation for the 42.01 while running his ID to insure he was not a felon and did indeed have a legal right to carry said firearm. If not every felon could then walk around with firearms unchallenged. Even in the beginning of the video the officer tells him, "Once I find out there's no issue...then you're going to be on your way."  That video will be seen by the judge and will not be seen in the defendant's favor. As soon as the officers could have ran his ID and found out he was not a felon then he would have been released and had his weapons returned to him. Instead he had to yell at the officers.
  • Futhermore the disarming of his concealed weapon was legal under Texas Government Code 411.207 which specifically states, "A peace officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's official duties may disarm a license holder at any time the officer reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual. The peace officer shall return the handgun to the license holder before discharging the license holder from the scene if the officer determines that the license holder is not a threat to the officer, license holder, or another individual and if the license holder has not violated any provision of this subchapter or committed any other violation that results in the arrest of the license holder."
  • He has been officially charged under Texas Penal Code Section 38.15.  INTERFERENCE WITH PUBLIC DUTIES. (a) A person commits an offense if the person with criminal negligence interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or otherwise interferes with: (1)  a peace officer while the peace officer is performing a duty or exercising authority imposed or granted by law;
  • It was indeed interference with public duties, the public duty of investigating the disorderly conduct called in by a concerned citizen.
  • Since he was arrested his long rifle, which was legal to carry, was now legally able to be taken as property for evidence
  • Since he was arrested his concealed handgun was able to be taken as well under Texas Government Code 411.206. SEIZURE OF HANDGUN AND LICENSE.(a) If a peace officer arrests and takes into custody a license holder who is carrying a handgun under the authority of this subchapter, the officer shall seize the license holder's handgun and license as evidence
  • Notice that taking a concealed weapon (disarming or seizing) requires a specific statute because concealed handgun carriers have specific rights. Firearms in any other situation, at your home, in your car, while hunting, can be taken if you are being arrested, he was arrested. Someone can be disarmed in any other situation during the course of an investigation.
  • So, yes, legally he can carry a concealed handgun as he was licensed, he can even carry a long arm open carry here in Texas, but that does not mean he can violate all these other laws and once he did violate other laws it opened the door for arrest and seizure. You can also drive legally in Texas if you are licensed but if you are being pulled over you have to stop, you just cannot keep going, and if you break other laws they can also arrest you and impound your car. Likewise, claims here of illegal detention, disarming, and seizure of weapons will not fly in court. The charges against him will likely stick. The lawsuit he is bringing against the city will definitely not.

Wrong wrong wrong wrong. According the the SC a person can not be detained simply for being in possesion of a fire arm. They HAVE to be suspected of criminal activity. Another being offended or concerned about another carrying a fire arm, is not reason to detain.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#64    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Humble Servent

  • Member
  • 10,826 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Parts Unknown

Posted 11 July 2013 - 11:22 AM

  • The exact call he was on was to investigate a violation of Texas Penal Code Section 42.01 DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly: (8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm;
Your whole premise against him comes from this law. Simply being in posession of a weapon is NOT calculated to alarm. He would have had to actualy DO something with said fire arm in order to fall under this law.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#65    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,608 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering that inner landscape connecting those throughout life

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 12 July 2013 - 01:47 AM

View Postpreacherman76, on 11 July 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

  • The exact call he was on was to investigate a violation of Texas Penal Code Section 42.01 DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly: (8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm;
Your whole premise against him comes from this law. Simply being in posession of a weapon is NOT calculated to alarm. He would have had to actualy DO something with said fire arm in order to fall under this law.


If a citizen was alarmed and called it in then law enforcement has every right to investigate. They did.


#66    Beckys_Mom

Beckys_Mom

    Sarcastic Muppet..!

  • Member
  • 51,196 posts
  • Joined:01 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ireland

  • "I hate pretentious people. I mean, what is the point in applying exorbitantly extensive vocabulary, it is just straightforwardly unnecessary".

Posted 12 July 2013 - 01:51 AM

Why hasn't someone suggested..  Best way to handle cops in any situation is to offer them a  bribe donut?

Edited by Beckys_Mom, 12 July 2013 - 01:52 AM.

Posted ImageRAW Berris... Dare you enter?

If there's a heaven...I hope to hell I get there !

#67    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,165 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 12 July 2013 - 02:19 AM

View PostThe world needs you, on 12 July 2013 - 01:47 AM, said:



If a citizen was alarmed and called it in then law enforcement has every right to investigate. They did.

Look into it check out the situation but in doing so violating the rights of the person in question. If it was any other way then anyone could just point a finger and make any aqusation they wanted to warrent a papers please response.  Im not a fan of the second amendment myself but the law is the law and the police are not above the constitution.

If the law states you can open carry fine and if the law also says you can not be asked for papers or demanded to be searched or detained for no reason other than a crime was commited that is also the law. Unless a crime or law has been broken the police do not have the power to demand ID. Thats the law.

Edited by The Silver Thong, 12 July 2013 - 02:22 AM.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#68    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,165 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 12 July 2013 - 02:23 AM

View PostBeckys_Mom, on 12 July 2013 - 01:51 AM, said:

Why hasn't someone suggested..  Best way to handle cops in any situation is to offer them a  bribe donut?

Im not sure if this is true I have never got a ticket in the US but by law you have to pay it on the spot or from the next township. Bribs I`m sure are rampit if this is true.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#69    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,504 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 12 July 2013 - 02:29 AM

July 4, 2013........ in America.



"there is no wrong or right - just popular opinion"

#70    xFelix

xFelix

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Joined:30 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Yea I'm Pagan, oh no!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 02:45 AM

View PostThe world needs you, on 09 July 2013 - 04:10 PM, said:

Indeed.

Most of these videos are produced by:

A. Those who did not grow up or live in areas with high police saturation. Having seen and knowing people who were shot growing up, now having someone recently get gunned down two houses down in front of their child and then having some teens shot down the block means you want good relations with the police.

B. Those who are not licensed to carry a concealed handgun. Of course everyone who does already knows to immediately show the officer your CHL along with your DL and insurance and to inform him/her a firearm is on your person.

Being polite can also indeed get you off with a warning. It has me!

WTF?! You just went full retard. NEVER go full retard!

Did not grow up or live in areas with high police saturation... Those are so similar that they count as one right?

Not licensed to carry a concealed weapon, but most of these people are pro-rights which means they're pro-gun-rights, which means they have a really high percentage to own a firearm...

Your entire post breaks down to: "We are not a police state, not **** and do what the police says or you're an idiot"

I've been stopped many times carrying my firearm... When in my vehicle, it is mandatory that I supply identification.. When on foot... Not even a first name.
Have you people no clue what happens when you identify yourself to a police officer? I'll shed some light.

Even if you are not breaking any laws, when an officer is called to a certain place, over a possible disturbance, a record is created. When you identify yourself, your name automatically goes into that record. While the record that seems to count is the one that you are convicted on, the one that nobody seems to know exists, is the call record... This means that if any law changes, even slightly, and for some messed up reason the government wanted to jack you up... They already have the proof they needed. Not to mention, this record can and in some cases IS used to substantiate criminal charges. For example, George Zimmerman. Even though it was not a crime for him to call the police as much as he did, because he Identified himself, and the prosecutors wanted him hanged, they elegantly reached into that record and tried using it to demonstrate a clear pattern of being a vigilante, thus murder would not be a stretch to him... Think about that for a second... Whether he is guilty or not, he seems to think he's innocent... How many times do we break some dumb law without knowing? Would you want the prosecutors to be able to bury you based on something as stupid as service calls?

On to the next thing, someone said that behaving this way slows the police down when they can be doing other things... Sorry to inform you, but uniformed police officers hardly ever do anything outside of traffic violations. They do tend to assist in apprehensions, maybe some grunt work around a crime scene, but they by no means do any of the other stuff you might think they do. In fact, some police officers in uniform would jack you up on fines over something as petty as having a busted headlight, while it's daytime....

Not to mention, that i've never seen a police stop end as quickly as when a citizen knows their rights. I have personally ended a police stop in a matter of seconds, how's that for taking up time... "Sir, my name is officer xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, I see you are carrying a firearm in public... " vs "The firearm is not being carried in an illegal fashion, I am not now, nor will I be in the process of committing a crime, carrying my firearm is not grounds for probable cause, you can only take possession of my firearm if I grant you permission to search and seizure, and by the way, I will not identify myself because I have no legal obligation to do so. Am I being detained or am I free to go?"

Edited by xFelix, 12 July 2013 - 03:19 AM.

My posts consist of my opinions, beliefs, and experiences, feel free to disagree in a respectful manner.

I have a right to my beleifs, just as you have a right to not agree with them.

So long as we respect each other's beliefs, we won't have a single problem.


#71    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,165 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 12 July 2013 - 03:11 AM

View Postacidhead, on 12 July 2013 - 02:29 AM, said:

July 4, 2013........ in America.



Saw this the other day. Now even if they did find something by useing the fith amendment he would get off by protecting himself with a camera and not saying anything to incriminate himself. The day the states says it`s illegal to video a cop is the day the nation plunges into a nose dive.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#72    xFelix

xFelix

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Joined:30 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Yea I'm Pagan, oh no!

Posted 12 July 2013 - 03:42 AM

View PostThe world needs you, on 12 July 2013 - 01:47 AM, said:

If a citizen was alarmed and called it in then law enforcement has every right to investigate. They did.

A citizen could be alarmed all they want, that does not prove that he intentionally displayed a firearm in a way calculated to alarm. I could walk into your home with my sidearm in it's holster on my hip, and to me that is perfectly normal... To you that would be very alarming... Would that mean that I intentionally calculated that to alarm you? Now if we did the same thing, and this time I was holding the firearm in a 'ready' position, without legal reason to do so.. Then yes I am intentionally causing alarm..

So how does any of this equate to learning your rights, and how to communicate with the sneaky people hired to be police officers?

My posts consist of my opinions, beliefs, and experiences, feel free to disagree in a respectful manner.

I have a right to my beleifs, just as you have a right to not agree with them.

So long as we respect each other's beliefs, we won't have a single problem.


#73    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,608 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering that inner landscape connecting those throughout life

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 12 July 2013 - 06:24 AM

View PostThe Silver Thong, on 12 July 2013 - 02:19 AM, said:

Look into it check out the situation but in doing so violating the rights of the person in question. If it was any other way then anyone could just point a finger and make any aqusation they wanted to warrent a papers please response.  Im not a fan of the second amendment myself but the law is the law and the police are not above the constitution.

If the law states you can open carry fine and if the law also says you can not be asked for papers or demanded to be searched or detained for no reason other than a crime was commited that is also the law. Unless a crime or law has been broken the police do not have the power to demand ID. Thats the law.

The only thing the Second Amendment does is prohibit the federal government from taking away someone's right to bear arms. Federal, not state.

The Supreme Court clearly ruled in Presser v. Illinois that a state has the right to enact their own firearm regulations to a certain degree.

If that was not so CJ Grisham would be able to open carry a handgun too but instead had the proper CHL and had it concealed.

The Second Amendment also has nothing to do with CJ Grisham's arrest in either case.

Do not even expect his lawyers to bring up the Second Amendment at trial.

Edited by The world needs you, 12 July 2013 - 06:40 AM.


#74    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,431 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 July 2013 - 08:32 AM

He was bearing arms and his arms were taken so the Second Amendment is obviously relevant to this case.   There is no evidence of criminal negligence from the video that I could see, and we don't have any other evidence, so as far as I can tell either we accept charges without evidence at this time or we don't.

Edit:  Let's not hijack this thread about a different video that's more relevant to guns than it is the OP.   Don't we have enough of this on the forum already?.   the world needs you, you didn't even watch the OP video and you admitted it, yet you're the biggest participant in this thread discussing everything else but.  If you want on-topic discussion, please watch the video presented in the OP and discuss the tactics that you only alluded to in the beginning but never even saw them to know what they are.   Grisham didn't follow the advice of the OP video so it's not relevant to discussion about it.

The Fifth Amendment (and to a lesser extent the Fourth) is relevant to this topic.  If the Second is relevant at all, its relevance is purely incidental.  

The following video adds additional depth to exercising our Fifth Amendment rights by referencing electronic and internet communications made after any initial police encounter because law enforcement will subpoena evidence as well as make additional attempts by phone and internet to get the subject of an investigation to incriminate himself.   If we know their tricks, we won't get fooled by them.  If we exercise our rights, they won't be obsolete like some people claim.



Edited by Yamato, 12 July 2013 - 08:49 AM.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#75    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,608 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering that inner landscape connecting those throughout life

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 12 July 2013 - 08:46 AM

View PostYamato, on 12 July 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:

He was bearing arms and his arms were taken so the Second Amendment is obviously relevant to this case.   There is no evidence of criminal negligence from the video that I could see, and we don't have any other evidence, so as far as I can tell either we accept charges without evidence at this time or we don't.

He was arrested on separate charges unrelated to any firearm offense. Being arrested in Texas and in most other jurisdictions around the world will result on any firearms on their person being taken away until the disposition of the case.

The Second Amendmemt has no relevance to his arrest or upcoming trial.

If wanting to disagree with why he was arrested (interference with public duty) then join the internet choir but the final decision will be up to judge or jury.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users