My friend held a burglar at gunpoint this morning, criminal crapped his pants!

[melensdad]

What justification does the office have to take the gun?? Assuming it was not discharged, it would not be evidence...

I don't know. It is a question that plagues me too.

[LRRPF52]

What justification does the office have to take the gun?? Assuming it was not discharged, it would not be evidence..

I'll bet if I had snuck up on the perp, and wacked him with a cast iron skillet they wouldn't take the skillet..

I too would have a very tough time giving up my gun.. I will be happy to render it safe (unload, remove slide, put it back into my safe etc), but give it up, man that would suck.. What if the bad guy's buddy were to come back after the LEO's left.. I would be defenseless - ok not really, but pretend I only had one gun..

flk k

There should be a one-for-one exchange if they insist on taking your firearm, since you are placing the citizen in an unreasonable position of defenselessness, especially when the perpetrator's associates become aware of your name, address, and details of your personal protection posture.

In the one event that I chose to discharge my handgun out of the 4 scenarios where a firearm in my hands yielded an outcome with me dominant and safe, the responding officers openly discussed taking my 1911, but then decided against it since I had access to so many other firearms within their view. They cited me for discharging in city limits, and one of them verbally promised to appear at my hearing and tell the DA to drop the charges, which is what happened.

This convinces me that there isn't some uber rule that trumps your rights to keep your personal property, and I would suggest discussing these issues with an attorney who can competently advise you on the laws of your State, which municipalities are legally bound to follow and not deviate from, given the nature of State law > city ordinance > PD policy.

[BjornF16]

the responding officers openly discussed taking my 1911, but then decided against it since I had access to so many other firearms within their view.

???? They would have taken your 1911 if it had left you with no weapons, but decided to not confiscate it since you had many other weapons readily available?...That makes no sense whatsoever!

They cited me for discharging in city limits, and one of them verbally promised to appear at my hearing and tell the DA to drop the charges, which is what happened.

You have a law that says you can't discharge at all within city limits?...or can't "reckless discharge" within city limits?

[LRRPF52]

That was in a different State than where I live now. They basically had a Lt. on the radio dictating to them how to proceed, demanding that they charge me with something, when it appeared that most of the guys on-scene had no real desire to charge me at all. The one who appeared at court as promised said his Lt. wanted to have me charged with a felony, but they somehow overrode him. The whole thing was FUBAR, if you ask me, but at least I walked away unscathed and alive, which is what counts.

That whole PD and County Sheriff's Dept. were quite corrupt, to be honest, as was the court system there. It's an open secret that people pay to get charges dismissed, and I saw this on several levels, confirmed by attorneys, and a PI who had been in the business for over 40 years. For starters, you could look at the county's DUI conviction rates where the military base was, then look at the neighboring county, and the stats were literally flip-flopped 15%/85%(Mil)...85%/15%(neighboring county). Once attention started to draw to the attorneys who specialized in these cases, they would pop out for a while to the other county before facing bar complaints, then pop back in a few years later. DUI's were the least of charges to be bought off, BTW.

[fkleinbu]

You have a law that says you can't discharge at all within city limits?...or can't "reckless discharge" within city limits?

Not sure of other places, but in Austin Texas, you are not allowed to discharge a weapon (and that includes pellet and BB Guns) within the city limits.. There are exceptions to which you can claim as a "defense against prosecution”, but that is at trial.. Discharge a firearm in Austin, regardless of the reason, and the LEO’s will take it.. You might get it back, but they are going to take it..

That is just one of the reasons I moved out into the rural part of Texas.. Living out in the country, the sheriff doesn’t suspect if you have a gun in the car, they expect you to have one <grin>..

In fact once a Texas DPS officer (Highway Patrolman) politely questioned my wife at a gas stop out in the middle of west Texas until she confessed she did indeed have a gun in the car.. Once she told him she had a gun, he seemed happy and went about his business.. He just wanted to make sure she would be safe, and he probably didn’t have to keep an eye on her and our two young girls with whom she was traveling..

Flk

[melensdad]

Realize that in the case of my friend, his gun was taken by the police despite the fact that he did NOT fire it. He simply used it to hold the criminal until the police arrived.

[fkleinbu]

There might have been laws regarding brandishing a weapon.. Who knows.. I would like to think I would have the presents of mind after I had I just held a perp until the police arrived, I would have not relased the gun until I had my attorney involved..

flk k

[melensdad]

There might have been laws regarding brandishing a weapon...

Nope, this happened in Indiana. No "brandishing" laws in this state. Further he was on his own property, etc. as per the Indiana codes I already quoted he was within his rights.

[LRRPF52]

There's a lot more to the story of course, but it is my understanding that it was against city ordinance to discharge a firearm within city limits, but not county. It wasn't that I had done something wrong in protecting myself as much as it had to do with one of the responding officers, and an encounter I had with him in the the previous year when calling the PD to respond to an assault on two of my friends, one who was a short little guy leaving the BBQ, the other who was literally on crutches trying to leave.

I witnessed the 6'4" 240-260 lb. owner of the establishment, who was drunker than a skunk, attacking these patrons as they were leaving, without provocation. The owner and some of his buddies pursued the assault on these retreating people, and expanded the assault to some more of my friends as they attempted to enter several vehicles and escape the assault. They got close to me, but stopped and withdrew the attack.

Anyway, we called emergency once we were in a safe area, and a very polite and professional-looking K-9 officer arrived, took our statements, and went to the establishment to gather more info. He returned about 45 minutes later, and said that the owner claimed he was defending himself, and was merely escorting my friends off his property. Here's the kicker...he had an off-duty PD officer buddy who backed his story 100%, and we were told that we were lucky they weren't pressing charges.

I did a major double-take, and asked this officer to repeat what he had just said, because it sounded like a sworn officer had just told him that my friends had initiated an assault (one on crutches) against a 6'4" drunkard business owner. He confirmed that I had heard him correctly. I told him emphatically that this was a bold-faced lie, and that I had just witnessed the whole incident, that I don't drink, and does he really believe a 4' kid and a guy on crutches attacked the owner? He said he had the statements he needed, and that the officer/witness was more reliable than us, and that we needed to move along before he found something to charge us with.

I asked how to file an official complaint against the officer, which I did with one of the sub-stations of the City PD, with a female Lt. who explained to me that things would get bad for me if it was determined that I was making a false statement against an officer. It turned out that the "officer/witness" wasn't even a cop anymore, but they still were treating him as if he was one.

Fast forward to the shooting incident. Guess who one of the responding officers was? Yeah, our K-9 friend, who made a false statement in that case as well, with regard to the evidence on the perpetrator's person directly linking him to the incident. When the owner of the vehicle went to recover it from police impoundment, this piece of evidence literally was in plain view as he opened the driver's door. The K-9 guy was the one who stopped and inspected the vehicle, and said everything looked good, there was no evidence as I had alleged to the responding officers.

They teach in BLET that 1/5 LEO's is dirty in some way. In that city, it wouldn't surprise me if it is 3/5 or more. Then I started getting randomly pulled over as soon as I pulled out from restaurants, businesses, etc. "Unnecessary swerving" was one reason I would hear. "Have you been drinking?"

When I was spending all my time on-post or deployed, when hearing locals talk about police corruption, I just thought they were ignorant red necks who didn't understand due process, protocols, or were guilty of something, and just making wild allegations against the police. Nope, they had it pretty much pegged, which their ignorance of the Constitution buffers because growing up in that reality makes you think that..."This is just the way it is...money talks, and BS walks." Unfortunately, they were right.

[fkleinbu]

Well it wouldn't be the first time an LEO over stepped his authority.. They have a real tough job to do, and do things on the "safe" side.. I don't always agree with them, but at least I understand.. When I was a lad, I used to be invited onto a deer lease up NE Texas on which just about everyone was either a Dallas LEO or family (as in my case).. Oh the stories I would hear at night once Jack Danials loosened the tongues a bit..

flk k

[BjornF16]

Not sure of other places, but in Austin Texas, you are not allowed to discharge a weapon (and that includes pellet and BB Guns) within the city limits.. There are exceptions to which you can claim as a "defense against prosecution”, but that is at trial.. Discharge a firearm in Austin, regardless of the reason, and the LEO’s will take it.. You might get it back, but they are going to take it..

FLK...that is BS on Austin's part. Unsupported by the state judiciary.

You need to read State of Texas v. Roman Rodriguez (San Antonio). The link is below:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/tx-court-of-criminal-appeals/1562640.html

Basically, Mr. Rodriguez discharged his pistol within S.A. city limits, was charged with recklessly discharging firearm within city limits. The judge slammed the state prosecutor (emphasis mine):

"The State's information alleged that Mr. Rodriguez recklessly discharged a firearm inside the corporate city limits of a municipality with a population of 100,000 or more, namely San Antonio, “by pulling the trigger on a firearm which contained ammunition and was operable.”   Well, of course he did.   Everyone who discharges a firearm pulls the trigger, and every firearm that is discharged contains ammunition and is operable if it discharges.   The State has, in essence, pled a tautology:  The defendant recklessly discharged a firearm because he discharged a firearm."

"The State's allegation of recklessness in this case tells the defendant nothing more than that he fired a gun within the city limits of San Antonio.   But, as the defendant argues, this penal offense is not one of strict liability that criminalizes every act of discharging a firearm within city limits.   Under the State's pleading, however, any act of “pulling the trigger on a firearm which contained ammunition and was operable” within the city limits of a large city would be recklessness per se and subject to prosecution under Section 42.12(a).5  Thus, if a person shoots at a robber or rapist climbing into his bedroom window, he could be prosecuted under the State's pleading.6  If he shoots at a rattlesnake lying in the bushes beside his home, he is liable to be prosecuted under this information.   If-as the trial judge hypothesized-he goes to the municipal shooting range and “pulls the trigger on a firearm which contained ammunition and was operable,” he may be prosecuted for a Class A misdemeanor.   Surely that is not the law.   These are not necessarily reckless acts.   They may be entirely appropriate and lawful acts under the particular circumstances.   It is only when the defendant is reckless in the manner or circumstances under which he “pull[s] the trigger on a firearm which contained ammunition and was operable” that he is criminally liable."

The went to two appeals courts in Texas...both upheld the original dismissal.

[LRRPF52]

They don't describe a Crown Vic trunk as "12 dead hooker capacity" for nothing...

I'll take our cops over police in any 3rd-world country any day, but you really never know who you're dealing with, so it's best to avoid encounters with them as a general rule.

My FIL was a Sheriff in a small town for many years, so I'm not just pulling this out of my magic gluteal fold hat. He's told me enough to confirm that what I've experienced in other places transpired there as well. During his BLET class, which was the first one in the State of Utah that had been incorporated into the new Federal Standards program of LE Agencies overseen by the FBI (under our buddy, LBJ), the Feds came into their classroom and pulled at least one guy who had been placed there by organized criminal enterprises to gain employment as an officer, with a long-term plan for acting as a double, basically. How often has that happened, and how many were never caught, especially if it was happening in podunkville Utah of all places in the late 1960's?

[BjornF16]

I have no tolerance for LEOs who lie...while I've never been involved in a shooting, I have seen LEOs lie or purposely deceive the judge as to the "complete truth". Maybe my military background doesn't serve me well in this capacity, but I believe LEOs should all be honorable enough to not lie or make false "official" statements.

After being told I was less credible than the drunk business owner, I think I would have moved (if possible)...where you stationed there?

[LRRPF52]

I did move. I couldn't really drive anywhere after a while, and I'm not a drinker. I have friends and family that are LEO's that are truly great people, and part of their job is to deal with society's worst on a daily basis. It makes many of them jaded, guarded, and always looking at their fellow men as likely or possible suspects, as they lean towards not seeing people as harmless do-gooders going about their business. This helps them maintain a good personal protective posture, but I think it leads to a lot of stress as well.

I couldn't do it. I would have a long gun out at almost every traffic stop if there were more than one person in the vehicle that didn't look like a family of 3 or 4. I know cops who have quit, only to be strong-armed back to the force because their spouses were addicted to the gubm't teet and benefits. I know guys who are great investigators who have taken a lot of truly bad people off the streets, but feel disrespected by society at-large, and get into the Federal application process where they will get paid for what they feel they're worth, and put up with some of the most incompetent, criminal supervisors, since the pay/benefits/sick leave/agency funding is so awesome.

It's an interesting career field, to say the least.

[hrt4me]

Realize that in the case of my friend, his gun was taken by the police despite the fact that he did NOT fire it. He simply used it to hold the criminal until the police arrived.

that's just crazy