Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
It's high time for a video of a great cop
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 1583404" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>I <em>somewhat</em> agree with your statement in bold. They are also expected to investigate to determine whether a law has been broken at all, given reasonable suspicion or probable cause. In the jurisdiction in question, OC is only legal if the firearm is unloaded. That gives an officer RS to investigate. Once the officer determined the gun was unloaded, he obviously had no intention of investigating further. Asking the subject for his name was not unreasonable. Neither was the subject's refusal to give it. The officer noted the decline and went on his merry way without the subjects name. He can however document that he asked for it and was refused. That way his superiors won't think him a failure in investigations 101. </p><p></p><p>As for polite, there's polite and then there's polite. More information is transmitted through non-verbal cues than spoken words. That's one reason that intent is sometimes impossible to fathom on forums. Sure, the words spoken by the subject were polite, but we can't see the non-verbal cues. The officer was polite, but I had no problems reading his true thoughts on the matter. He went through the motions to prevent a PR disaster, but he most likely thought the subject was acting foolish. I certainly think the subject was acting foolish for carrying an empty gun in the open. Just as entering an intersection on a green light is legal, doing so when a semi is running his red light isn't wise. There is such a thing as being "dead right". </p><p></p><p>I haven't called the subject names, but anyone can have a personal opinion about anyone else. After all, as you so astutely point out, it's a free country, right? <img src="/images/smilies/smile.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 1583404, member: 1132"] I [I]somewhat[/I] agree with your statement in bold. They are also expected to investigate to determine whether a law has been broken at all, given reasonable suspicion or probable cause. In the jurisdiction in question, OC is only legal if the firearm is unloaded. That gives an officer RS to investigate. Once the officer determined the gun was unloaded, he obviously had no intention of investigating further. Asking the subject for his name was not unreasonable. Neither was the subject's refusal to give it. The officer noted the decline and went on his merry way without the subjects name. He can however document that he asked for it and was refused. That way his superiors won't think him a failure in investigations 101. As for polite, there's polite and then there's polite. More information is transmitted through non-verbal cues than spoken words. That's one reason that intent is sometimes impossible to fathom on forums. Sure, the words spoken by the subject were polite, but we can't see the non-verbal cues. The officer was polite, but I had no problems reading his true thoughts on the matter. He went through the motions to prevent a PR disaster, but he most likely thought the subject was acting foolish. I certainly think the subject was acting foolish for carrying an empty gun in the open. Just as entering an intersection on a green light is legal, doing so when a semi is running his red light isn't wise. There is such a thing as being "dead right". I haven't called the subject names, but anyone can have a personal opinion about anyone else. After all, as you so astutely point out, it's a free country, right? :) [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
It's high time for a video of a great cop
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom