Unfortunately, we mere civilians are considered guilty until the ONLY ONES decide that there may be a possibility
that a lawfully-carrying gun owner could be just exercising our God-given rights.
My encounter with Opd tonight
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 farmerRick |
|||
|
Posts: 300 (10/31/09 17:17:22) |
"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing." -Thomas Jefferson
Nebraska Firearms Owners Association-Board of Directors Member NRA Life Member |
||
|
bullrider8 |
|||
|
Posts: 178 (10/31/09 19:06:42) |
Rowell1 the new law does over-ride registration in Omaha LB430 clearly states that if you hold a ccw permit you do not need to register it with OPD only
persons who buy a gun and have no ccw permit need to register their firearm! And also they already had the firearm there was no other reason or probable cause
to search my vehicle. They didnt double lock my cuffs they slapped them on tighter than should be. As for my gun being stolen I have valid registration my name
and serial is right on the card. I still believe they need to review their policy on CCW since it is new and alot of officers have no clue about it at all one
even said this was the first permit he has seen and didnt know anything about them. Now for you guys who want to open carry just imagine what could happen!
If guns cause crime mine must be defective!!!!
|
||
|
ram4x4nut |
|||
|
Posts: 301 (10/31/09 21:18:48) |
I'm pretty sure I would have gone directly to OPD HQ as soon as they released me, asked for the most senior person there and filed a complaint against
every one of the officers. The next morning I would have been contacting my attorney.
I also know that I would NOT have given them permission to search my vehicle. They had no right whatsoever to do that. |
||
|
rowell1 |
|||
|
Posts: 99 (11/01/09 16:40:06) |
bullrider8 wrote: Actually LB 430 does not state you don't have to register your firearm. This is what it says:
Yes, they had your firearm, but they had no idea if you had another firearm in your vehicle. With that in mind, they can search the immediate area within your reach in the vehicle, but not the glove box, without your permission. Just like they can frisk you for weapons. And how do you know they didn't double lock the cuffs? Your hands were behind your back. Handcuffs are meant to restrain, and not designed for
comfort, and depending on your physical build, they may seem tight.
|
||
|
rowell1 |
|||
|
Posts: 100 (11/01/09 16:51:21) |
farmerRick wrote: Here we go with the ONLY ONES crap again, you really are anti police, anti government, anti authority, which is the attitude that I get from most of CCWers here. And that's fine. It's an US versus THEM mentality. So be it. The cops are your enemy, I get that. This is my last post ever in this forum and it's left me with a bad taste. I had never realized the level of anti police feelings among CCWers until now. Delete my membership here as it's obvious ONLY ONES are not welcome. It's US versus THEM now. |
||
|
ram4x4nut |
|||
|
Posts: 302 (11/01/09 17:41:24) |
"Any existing permit, or regulation regulating possession, or transportation of a concealed ownership, possession, or transportation is authorized under the act, is declared to be null and void as against any permitholder Rowell1, you are completely wrong. The above is from your post. Having to register a concealed handgun IS regulating the possession of said weapon. If you can't legally posseses it without registration then THAT IS regulating. This EXPLICITLY says that Omaha cannot force a permit holder, no matter where they live, to register their weapons. I'm not a lawyer, but that is quite clear. It's the ONLY-ONE's like you that think your job is to interpret the law that pits US against THEM. Your job is to enforce the law, not interpret it. And it really sucks for us non-ONLY-ONE's when we run into people with an almighty complex not unlike yours. I have no problem with LEO's. I do have problems with people that post erroneous info and people that just love to cause problems. You fit that bill perfectly. I think this is mainly the reason why people here are anti-YOU.
Last Edited By: ram4x4nut
11/01/09 17:48:41.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
farmerRick |
|||
|
Posts: 301 (11/01/09 18:46:54) |
rowell1 wrote: Rowell1, I'm sorry you took that personally, as it was not directed towards you, but at the officers in Bullrider8's story. I'm not "anti-police". I am against the attitude (of what seems to be the majority in law enforcement) that the police have more of a right to carry a firearm than I do, and are the ONLY ONES qualified enough to do so. The US versus THEM mentality seems to usually come from the law enforcement side.
"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing." -Thomas Jefferson
Nebraska Firearms Owners Association-Board of Directors Member NRA Life Member |
||
|
bullrider8 |
|||
|
Posts: 179 (11/01/09 19:51:57) |
Well if one little comment is enough to make someone leave the site then thats there problem. I was there when this happened I know the facts and what happened
so take it for what its worth. We all know what your comments meant Farmer Rick and I for one wasnt offended by it, in this day and age its sad to say some
police officers feel they are above the law and can get away with anything (Not all officers are bad) its the regular people who need to be aware and able to
stand up and call them on it. Ram I new you would post the correct info on lb 430 thats why i wasnt worried about it and you knew exactly where it was located
always can count on you to deliver. For the most part we have some really great members here on this site we might not always agree or see eye to eye but I for
one am glad to be able to share stories and info with all of you.
If guns cause crime mine must be defective!!!!
|
||
|
jimbob86 |
|||
|
Posts: 1309 (11/01/09 22:58:28) |
rowell1 wrote:ONLY ONES are NOT welcome here, IMO: Only Ones being ANYONE who thinks they are above the Law, and are special. Equality Before the Law is the flippin' State Motto, and words mean something. If they don't, then the Law does not mean squat, and those sworn to uphold it are just a bunch of asshats parading around in shiny uniforms in cars with pretty lights. Rowel1 - if you think we hate cops, you are mistaken: you seem to think the terms LEO and Only One are interchangable. They are NOT. I despise the latter and respect the former. Being a Law Enforcement Officer is a difficult calling, but it does not make anyone better than everyone else they are sworn to protect and serve. By lumping "CCWers" into a group, you seem to be excluding yourself from that group: You are a civilian carrying a concealed weapon...... this group includes you, no? If you think, otherwise, and do not beleive you are a "civilian"....... well then..... we'll just never agree an that. Best of luck with that US vs. THEM crap. Armor up, crack down, hunker down in that bunker: continue to militarize: it won't be long until Omaha is indistinguishable from Baghdad or Kabul. The police can't get any coperation from the people in North O now. Continue to alienate the rest of the City, the rest of the State................... ........OR: Go read Sir Robert Peel. Here's the Cliff's notes: http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2008/04/police-are-public-and-public-are-police.html 1) The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder. 2) The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions. 3) Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public. 4) The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force. 5) Police seek and preserve public favor not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law. 6) Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient. 7) Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.  Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
9) The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it. Pay special attention to # 7 and #5. .......
.....Clingin' to my guns over here, Boss.......
|
||
|
JWeedy |
|||
|
Posts: 48 (11/01/09 23:12:26) |
Jimbo,
Thank you for bringing Sir Robert Peel's ideals into the discussion. I completely agree that his statements are valid in this situation, as he is considered to be "the father of modern policing". Unfortunately some, if not most of the ideas he had I believe have been lost over time. In my personal opinion one of the most valuable tools no longer truly used in law enforcement is community policing. Granted the concern for such actions are there is more possibility for corruption, but unfortunately I think time has proven that corruption is possible in any given department or community. And dare I say the much larger departments are more prone to corruption. FYI I have made these observations as a student in the Criminal Justice field, as well as being an intern with a smaller police department. It is actually nice to see first hand a police department that is in touch with the community, and also that knows the majority of the population even when they are not "frequent flyers". |
||
|
jimbob86 |
|||
|
Posts: 1310 (11/01/09 23:39:00) |
I have brought up Sir Robert before...... apparently to no avail.
.....Clingin' to my guns over here, Boss.......
|
||
|
David Hineline |
|||
|
Posts: 330 (11/02/09 02:31:26) |
Buy a longer shirt.
|
||
|
farmerRick |
|||
|
Posts: 302 (11/02/09 07:22:43) |
David Hineline wrote: Best advice in this whole thread!!
"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing." -Thomas Jefferson
Nebraska Firearms Owners Association-Board of Directors Member NRA Life Member |
||
|
mustang5o |
|||
|
Posts: 82 (11/02/09 10:03:37) |
Does anyone have confirmation form the AG that the wording of LB430 excludes citizens of Omaha from registering handguns with OPD unless you purchase in the
City Limits of Omaha? I can see this being an issue at some point.
"But if someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." the Dalai Lama.
|
||
|
quixnet |
|||
|
Posts: 183 (11/02/09 14:57:26) |
Buy a longer shirt and maybe a new muffler...
|
||
|
bullrider8 |
|||
|
Posts: 190 (11/19/09 13:26:26) |
******Update******
After calling the Chief of police and leaving my name and number I just got a call back from a high up officer we talked about the incident and he told me once I informed them that I was a ccw permit holder they should have de- escalated the situation. He said many things about the stop bothered him, from the way the officers talked to me the way I was handcuffed and the over all treatment of me. He pulled the entire report and we went over it and he was a super nice guy. He said the officers would be getting called down and they were going to be yelled at and given a briefing on CCW law and procedure as well as the entire Opd officer staff he thinks that we ccw permit holders are law abidding people and he said he enjoyed talking with me and he liked that I was very knowledge and informed on CCW law and he wished the officers were that way but since its new he needed to get a new policy in effect so this wont happen again. He did tell me I could file a complaint against the officers and they would be dealt with but I told him I wasnt here to get anyone in trouble or cause problems I said I really like OPD and am glad they are out there doing what they do and respect them for it but they need to learn the new laws etc to enforce the correctly. He agreed, we talked for a hr and a half and wrote alot of notes and shared ideas on new policy and said they would get started on this right away and get it sent to all command officers so they can share it with the officers. So my out come on this is very positive and think that some good will come out of it for future stops.
If guns cause crime mine must be defective!!!!
|
||
|
farmerRick |
|||
|
Posts: 307 (11/19/09 17:36:01) |
Good job!!
"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing." -Thomas Jefferson
Nebraska Firearms Owners Association-Board of Directors Member NRA Life Member |
||
|
jimburnetto |
|||
|
Posts: 880 (11/19/09 23:24:47) Member |
Great to hear. Thanks for taking the time and effort on this. It sounds like you did the right thing!
|
||
|
NETim |
|||
|
Posts: 519 (11/20/09 08:45:46) |
rowell1 wrote:Sorry to see you go but that's your choice. Much animosity was demonstrated towards permit holders and the process by various police depts and public officials during the great CCW debate. It caused some hard feelings as evidenced here. It would have been better all the way around if the opponents of CCW had simply done their homework instead of getting all emotional and slandering the proponents of CCW. Both sides need to realize that the bad attitudes on both sides of the issue are relatively few in number and don't represent the majority. I certainly hope that in the future in your career as a LEO, you will be just as quick to deride those police officers you may encounter who reflect the "only ones" attitude that so many of us here abhor.
"Blessed are they who, in the face of death, focus on the front sight." -Col Jeff Cooper
|
||
|
Immortality |
|||
|
Posts: 25 (11/21/09 09:44:27) |
rowell1 wrote:This is incorrect. Under US v. Gant, once the subject is in custody (and being handcuffed outside your vehicle would qualify) the police cannot search the vehicle unless they can demonstrate an actual and continuing threat to their safety posed by an arrestee, or a need to preserve evidence related to the crime of arrest from tampering by the arrestee. So one, you were no longer a threat to their safety and two you were not under arrest so there was no need to preserve evidence. They would have needed a search warrant to search your vehicle. A Terry search is only the search of your person to make sure you do not have a weapon on your person. The US Supreme Court finally struck down the rediculous notion that somehow a person in custody in the back of a patrol car could somehow get access to a weapon that is still in his vehicle. I understand officer safety but it's not Constitutional when the safety issue is clearly being abused as an excuse to search a vehicle. Common sense and Constitutional Rights are upheld on occation. |
||
