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 Range
Law & Order
What the Hell?
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="Michael Brown" data-source="post: 1555909" data-attributes="member: 18"><p>The above is the issue.</p><p></p><p>Section E is not active in the sense that it prohibits an officer from disarming a cititzen; it merely states that the SDA does not grant him the specific authority to do so. That is done by federal caselaw.</p><p></p><p>That is what everyone who thinks disarming during the course of a traffic stop is illegal does not seem to understand.</p><p></p><p>I would be interested in knowing how many of those who say this practice is against the law have any practical experience or education in the law i.e. a law degree, LEO, expert witness etc.</p><p></p><p>Opinions of those who work in this area are not the equal of a hobbyist. An individual without experience/education in this area frequently misinterprets some fairly simple concepts i.e. all the folks who still don't understand the concept of affirmative defense as in the Ersland case.</p><p></p><p>No matter how much people want it to be so, they are incorrect in this matter when it comes to the legality of temporarily securing a weapon during a traffic stop.</p><p></p><p>Michael Brown</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Michael Brown, post: 1555909, member: 18"] The above is the issue. Section E is not active in the sense that it prohibits an officer from disarming a cititzen; it merely states that the SDA does not grant him the specific authority to do so. That is done by federal caselaw. That is what everyone who thinks disarming during the course of a traffic stop is illegal does not seem to understand. I would be interested in knowing how many of those who say this practice is against the law have any practical experience or education in the law i.e. a law degree, LEO, expert witness etc. Opinions of those who work in this area are not the equal of a hobbyist. An individual without experience/education in this area frequently misinterprets some fairly simple concepts i.e. all the folks who still don't understand the concept of affirmative defense as in the Ersland case. No matter how much people want it to be so, they are incorrect in this matter when it comes to the legality of temporarily securing a weapon during a traffic stop. Michael Brown [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
What the Hell?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom