Author Topic: police  (Read 20619 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Valiss

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 235
Re: police
« Reply #45 on: July 17, 2008, 03:46:45 PM »
Sounds like you might be interested in http://ratemycop.com

Offline robert of armstrong

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 213
  • Pain is simply pride prying weakness from the body
Re: police
« Reply #46 on: July 17, 2008, 06:25:19 PM »
Cobaltblu, this has to be the worst advice I have ever heard when dealing with the Police:

“ if anyone hassles you just ask them why they are wasting their time harassing someone who attends renaissance festivals instead of preventing a real crime which actually has a victim somewhere. “


Perhaps only overshadowed by:

“if someone hassled you about having something perfectly legal...then give them a piece of your mind and give them the finger.”


Do you want beeboy to get in trouble?

It is Officer’s job to solve and prevent crime.  If you are walking around with a sword, the Police are going to talk to you.  It’s kind of what they are paid to do.  If they weren’t to, how could they know that you weren’t going to inspire news stories like these?





Imagine if an Officer saw a person with a sword (or like weapon) and did nothing, and then after the Officer goes around the corner, that person attacked a family member of yours with it?  Would you be upset that the Officer didn’t stop the person and prevent the attack?  Like that wouldn’t result in a lawsuit.

As I said, if an Officer has taken the opportunity to speak with you, and asks if you have any weapons on you, you may want to be honest, and explain why you have them.  Do not lie.  To not tell the Officer to find a real criminal.  Do not give the Officer the finger.  These are good ways to find yourself in the lockup.  Plus they are just ignorant things to even suggest to say or do.  If you have that much of a problem with the Police, perform a little self-examination and figure out for yourself why.
Always on the lookout for my next noble cause.

And because a flail don't need reloading, that's why.

Offline Julianne

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 500
Re: police
« Reply #47 on: July 17, 2008, 06:39:22 PM »
So...why were you "stopped by the police" in the first place?

Oh good gracious....this question is just posed for some other cause in my opinion.

We have all sorts of people with all kinds of reasons that sport guns and bows and various weaponry all the time on any day, any hour, and for any reason in this country as is our right to do so.

In many states it's perfectly legal to sport guns on the person at any time with the proper licenses.  A sword in your car when you are donning garb, on the road to a faire...really? 

Don't be silly. 
« Last Edit: July 17, 2008, 06:52:27 PM by Julianne »

Offline Cobaltblu

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 257
  • "The Fox" - Theodore Hief
    • Click here for photos of my garb and items
Re: police
« Reply #48 on: July 17, 2008, 07:03:17 PM »
If it is perfectly legal to wear a sword or dagger on my belt in a public place or to possess them on my person there is absolutely no reason for me to have to put up with being detained or questioned by the police.  Absolutely no reason at all...and any such questioning is hassling in my opinion.  I have to draw a line in the sand somewhere regarding a person's rights under the law.  If something is perfectly legal they owe no explanation whatsoever regarding their choice to do that thing.  If people accept being questioned about why they are doing something which is perfectly legal then they are becoming accustomed to limitations on their rights and the next step is having those rights taken away by government.

I meant no offense to anyone when I said that if your carrying daggers and swords is perfectly legal to give someone a peace of your mind or even the finger if you are hassled about it.

It is true that if a person inadvertently carried a sword to a renaissance festival in an illegal manner that they probably shouldn't give a police officer a peace of their mind.  However I do believe in civil disobedience and do support speaking out regarding ridiculous laws.  I certainly do not want Beeboy to have any negative consequences and he's certainly old enough to make his own choices.

I am not anti-law enforcement however I am pro-freedom and admittedly absolutely reject any infringement of a person's rights regardless of whether it may serve to make people happier about the security of the country.  I do believe that in the majority of cases what is illegal is also what is wrong and what is legal is what is right...however I absolutely support individuals who speak out against ridiculous laws which are unnecessary.

As I said I am not anti-law enforcement however I can't agree with a black&white interpretation of what is right and wrong based merely on what is legal and illegal.  There have been too many examples around the world and through history of unjust laws passed.  If bringing a sword in your car to attend a renaissance festival was a Class A Felony it wouldn't make me any more inclined to agree that carrying a sword in your trunk to a renaissance festival was wrong.  I do support the social contract between citizens and government in which we obey the law and trust government to largely provide for our security and the protection of our rights.  But it is every citizens duty to speak out against laws which we disagree with.

Most police officers are good and just people who apply the law in an even manner however I have to say that if the difference between letting someone off with a warning and charging them with absolutely everything the officer can think of and support...is merely whether the officer liked the person or whether the person expressed their opinions...then the officer isn't doing their job.

Regards,

CB
Click on my website icon on the left to view my photo album of garb and items.

Offline Julianne

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 500
Re: police
« Reply #49 on: July 17, 2008, 07:12:53 PM »
Ahhhhhhhh....aye ...

I remember the innocence of youth.

I've never had the fortunate latitude of ignorance and age.
 

Offline Zaubon

  • True R/F.com Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 513
    • Myspace
Re: police
« Reply #50 on: July 17, 2008, 11:01:02 PM »
Being an extreme libertarian, I agree with the principles being expressed. As a former cop, and a person with an very great aversion to the inside of jail cells, I also recognize that the blue always wins on the side of the road.
Feel free to follow your principles, but recognize that if you respond to the most understanding officer in the way you are describing, you are going to get a free ride and a chance to explain it to the Judge on Monday morning. You may be absolutely right in every detail of the law, but with so many laws on the books, I'm generally in violation of several. Even if the officer can't come up with a charge that sticks, (a doubtful supposition) you're not going to get a chance to tell your side of the story until Monday morning. If the judge is sympathetic and drops all of the charges, you've still missed a weekend of faire.
I'd rather try to comply with the principle expressed by the officers that have responded and talk gently, and hope to get away with at worst a stern lecture on the side of the road.
This is a battle that was lost many years ago. Now we're just riding the slippery slope down history.

Offline robert of armstrong

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 213
  • Pain is simply pride prying weakness from the body
Re: police
« Reply #51 on: July 18, 2008, 05:04:55 AM »
I wonder to what ever happened to simply explaining yourself, though.

Officer:  "Although I have stopped you for speeding (or tail-light out, running that red light back there, or whatever), why do you have a sword in your back seat?"

Answer one:  "I'm on my way to/from a Renaissance Festival (or Faire, or SCA/LARP gathering or whatever).  It's part of my character and garb.  It is in a scabbard.  Is there a better way to transport it?  What would you recommend?"  You have now brought the Officer into the process of coming to a resolution for your potential problem.  You and they are now on the same team, working towards a solution together.  Plus, when you are conversing on how to better transport it, the Officer may either forget about the original reason for stopping you or see how reasonable you are, and feel that a simple verbal warning may be enough to change that original behaviour instead of a writen reminder (ticket).

Answer two:  "Isn't there a real criminal you should be out there bothering?  I'm not doing anything wrong, I know my rights.  Don't tell me what to do.  You know my taxes pay your salary, right?"  How could anyone turn this negative interaction into and positive outcome?  Is there anyway you can see the Officer apologizing and slinking back to their scout car with their tail between their legs?  Or do you think that they might just use those neat things called laws (that they are paid to enforce, not to give breaks on) to their fullest?  Leaping to the offensive in this manner and trying to take on a person head-on can only hinder the conflict resolution.  And the Officer has the law on his side, they are doing what they are paid, what the vast majority of people want them to do.  Is there any way you can see yourself coming out on top, taking this attitude?

On top of that, it's just plain rude.  Why would you want to represent yourself that way?
Always on the lookout for my next noble cause.

And because a flail don't need reloading, that's why.

Offline Tipsy Gypsy

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 353
  • Bee bait / butterfly perch; have mead, will camel.
Re: police
« Reply #52 on: July 18, 2008, 07:39:14 AM »
And try thanking the officer for doing his job. You wouldn't believe how many tickets I've avoided by saying "I wasn't aware that I had a broken light/failed to signal when changing lanes/was speeding; thank you for pointing that out. I'll get it taken care of as soon as I can/pay more attention/use my cruise control." It might cost a teeny bit of pride,  but speaking for myself, I have plenty left over. ;D And if it'll save me some stress and maybe even the cost of a ticket, I can "put on my big girl panties" and suck up the pride for a few minutes.
"It's just water, officer, I swear. And yeast. And a little honey. How the alcohol got in, I have no idea!"

Offline Black Armor

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 92
Re: police
« Reply #53 on: July 18, 2008, 11:12:15 AM »
Thanks Blak Duke...



If it is perfectly legal to wear a sword or dagger on my belt in a public place or to possess them on my person there is absolutely no reason for me to have to put up with being detained or questioned by the police.  Absolutely no reason at all...and any such questioning is hassling in my opinion.  I have to draw a line in the sand somewhere regarding a person's rights under the law.  If something is perfectly legal they owe no explanation whatsoever regarding their choice to do that thing. 


CB, your profile says you're from New York so I read the NY law on this.  Here is the important part:

New York - Penal Law Section 265.01. A person is guilty of
criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree when:
 
  (2) He possesses any dagger, dangerous knife, dirk, razor, stiletto,
imitation pistol, or any other dangerous or deadly instrument or weapon
with intent to use the same unlawfully against another;

- Section 265.15 Presumption of possession, unlawful intent,
   and defacement...     

... The possession by any person of any dagger, dirk,
   stiletto, dangerous knife or any other weapon, instrument,
   appliance or substance designed, made or adapted for use
   primarily as a weapon, is presumptive evidence of intent
   to use the same unlawfully against another.

In a nut shell this says is that it is illegal in NY to carry a dangerous weapon with unlawful intent BUT the law automatically presumes you have unlawful intent because you’re carrying the weapon.

So, it is not “perfectly legal” for you to carry a sword or dagger on your belt in public and you DO owe the police an explanation if you are questioned about it.  If you throw a fit because you’re being “hassled” and start being uncooperative with the officer and telling him you’re not going to answer any of his questions because you “don’t have to put up with it”, then things are probably going to be bad for you.  On the other hand, being calm and rational and explaining your purpose for having the weapon will go much further with any officer and most importantly, demonstrates that you don’t have “unlawful intent”.  Without your polite explanation, the officer has no way of knowing what your intent is and the law by itself assumes your intent with the weapon is unlawful.

People don’t have to agree with every law and lord knows there are some laws that I think are stupid but that doesn’t mean we don’t have to obey them.  If you don’t like it, work to change it the correct way but “drawing a line in the sand” while you’re armed and standing on the side of the road with a police officer isn’t the time or place and is probably going to get you arrested.  I’m sure officers in NY are allowed to use their discretion just as officers here are so help them to use it in your favor and not against you.         
« Last Edit: July 18, 2008, 11:15:17 AM by Black Armor »

Offline Cobaltblu

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 257
  • "The Fox" - Theodore Hief
    • Click here for photos of my garb and items
Re: police
« Reply #54 on: July 18, 2008, 01:42:17 PM »
You have some good points Black Armor, and perhaps I have been over zealous.

You quoted the New York State Law and as you said it can be interpreted to mean that the mere possession of an instrument whose purpose is use as a weapon...is enough to certify that your carrying it is intent to use it as a weapon.

I have no idea how someone determines whether a dagger itself is intended to be used as a weapon or used to cut meat at the cooking fire.  The law states "...designed, made or adapted for use primarily as a weapon...".  This says nothing about the person's intent in carrying it...but merely speaks of the physical dagger itself.  The other section you reference additionally states that if a person intends to use something as a weapon they committed a crime.

Someone could say, hey my sword was not designed to primarily be used as a weapon because someone sold it to me who sells them to people who go to renaissance festivals...however if that sword has an edge on it and it not rounded and blunt how could that be the case?  Could someone say that their 40 Inch long sharp blade on their sword was meant for hunting deer or cutting bread?

So this would mean that even if someone wore a dagger or sword at a renaissance festival (Sterling for example) in New York and had no intent to harm anyone they would still be committing a crime if the dagger or sword's primary use was as a weapon.

I think almost everyone who carries daggers and swords at renaissance festivals would agree that the primary use of the instruments themselves are as weapons (although their intent is not to use them as weapons against someone) and that they are carrying weapons (though peace-tied).  I believe you yourself mentioned you brought bladed weapons to Sterling this last weekend.  Does this mean that technically you as a police officer carried weapons in violation of New York State law and crossed the border with them?  I am not trying to insinuate you committed a crime but just showing how vague the law is.

What primary use, other than a weapon, could there be for a real sword?  A real sword is designed to be used as a weapon, regardless of the intent of the owner is when they carry it.  The same could be said of a long dagger.  However all the off duty cops at Sterling didn't say a word to people who wore swords and daggers to the faire.

Based on this information you provided it isn't cut and dry at all in New York apparently regarding a person's right to own or carry a dagger or sword.

The problem I have with laws like these is the fact that they are not clear enough for any single person to understand and be absolutely confident they are not breaking the law.  People have to try to do the right thing and hope the particular police officer they come across agrees with their interpretation.  One person could not even be spoken too and the next person could be charged with multiple felonies.

It would be better to have no law at all and merely punish people for their actions, I.E. if they attack someone with a sword, or if they threaten someone.  People have a need for bladed instruments at home and outside of home (cooking and preparing food, hunting, camping, cutting sheet rock, cutting rope, etc).  It is just too fine a line between bladed instruments people NEED to use in their daily lives...and the law's vague definition of what a dangerous weapon is.

I apologize if I offended anyone or if anyone thinks I support crime or dislike police officers.

Regards,

CB
Click on my website icon on the left to view my photo album of garb and items.

Offline Molden

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 503
Re: police
« Reply #55 on: July 18, 2008, 02:23:02 PM »
Oy vey! What a discussion!

All I can say is, in my interactions with the gents driving the rolling disco-teques - I've kept my talking to a minimum, and I DO mean minimum. When I did talk, I was respectful, did not raise my voice or become animated in any way, and complied completely.

I've walked away from tickets and recently, a LOT more than that involving other than "sharp, pointy objects" in Louisiana - where by all rights, I should have been in the back of the squad car wearing those lovely, shiny police-issue bracelets. It ended with them handing me back my dl & insurance, and told me to have a nice day. And believe me, if I exercised my "rights" I certainly would have been in the squad car. But I didn't, and got off without so much as a written warning or citation.

As I walked back to my car, the lead officer asked my age. When I told him, he asked "Isn't it time for you to grow up?". The smart-weed puller rennie in me wanted to quip back something - in good nature. In the end, I swallowed it and said "You've got a point officer. Thank you.".

Sure, it's great in the movies and in Marvel comics to be bold and witty in those situations. And they're great "war stories" for the bar... but in reality, not so much. I may be a Pyrate and a wild-arse, but that badge and gun means they are in charge of the situation at that time.
Cat-like & Mercurial

Reliably Unreliable

Offline Black Armor

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 92
Re: police
« Reply #56 on: July 18, 2008, 04:59:31 PM »
CB,

I got a chuckle out of that law when I read it.  I neglected to add that there is also case law dealing with "intent" where a guy was carrying a knife in a sheath on his belt but was shown that he did not have "unlawful intent" and he was okay.  That's what I was getting at.  If the officer talked to you he should see why you are carrying it and that you don't have unlawful intent but you have to at least cooperate with him and explain the situation so he can determine that.

Offline robert of armstrong

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 213
  • Pain is simply pride prying weakness from the body
Re: police
« Reply #57 on: July 18, 2008, 08:18:58 PM »
As I understand it, the unlawful intent clause is to be interpereted as the person is understood to have unlawful intent unless they can show that their intent is not unlawful.  Simply put, if you can explain why you have whatever weapon, and it is a good and lawful reason, then you are okay.  If you can't or don't explain, it is can be considered that your intent is unlawful.
Always on the lookout for my next noble cause.

And because a flail don't need reloading, that's why.

Offline Just Randall

  • R/F.com Member
  • Posts: 200
Re: police
« Reply #58 on: July 19, 2008, 03:11:00 AM »
"Guilty until proven innocent?"
Mediocrity is the refuge of the unimaginative...

Baron Doune

  • Guest
Re: police
« Reply #59 on: July 19, 2008, 06:46:36 AM »
In my day I did a bit of hitchhiking.  Coast to coast several times.

Spent four days in the Nashville jail and three days in a St. Louis jail.  Both times for telling the officer that I refused to be searched and just being a smart weed puller with long hair.

Both times no charges were made by the judge on Monday.

It's part of the lifestyle when traveling in that mode.  If the cop thinks you pose a danger to anyone, you'll end up in jail for a few days while they check you out.  It's called reality.

In most cases if you're polite and pretend to respect their authority they'll let you be on your way.  Be open and completely honest.

Btw, most states can hold you on a vagrancy charge for just being there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagrancy_(people)

Good luck to you in your travels.  Eat lots of canned fish, it's high in protein, easy to carry and you can get by on as little as one can a day.

ps.  In Nashville where I was arrested, two people were stabbed to death the same day that I was picked up.  Their bodies dumped into a ditch on the interstate I was on.  Cops do have their reasons for checking.





 

Web hosting provided by www.RangeHosting.us
YeOldeRF