So lets suppose...

[jawjadawg]

That depends on where you are and what you are doing....it isn't about whether I would have a "right" to detain and question you, it is about a duty to protect the public. If you are walking into the bank with it or into Kroger that is a little unusual and would give any rational person a concern as to why. If you parked on a country road and walking into a field , I would wave at you and go on by.

I didn't say anything about walking in to a private business with the gun. I said walking around on the sidewalk, and you can pick the street to be as busy as you want. You don't have the right to detain and question me on it, no matter how odd or strange YOU might think it is because I haven't broken any laws. It is absolutely about a "right" as the police officer does not have a "duty" to violate my rights by stopping me when I haven't broken any laws. You also have a duty to honor, observe, and protect MY rights, which include walking the streets with a rifle or shotgun.

What part of behaving legally constitutes suspicious behavior and simultaneously poses a threat to the public? Now be careful here, because if you say merely walking around with a loaded long gun is cause enough then do some more research because you are mistaken. I apologize for putting words in your mouth, but you seem to be implying the above with your comments about leaving me alone if I were out in the country in a field. I pose no more of a threat to the public walking down the streets with my rifle or shotgun than any individual driving their vehicle, who might at any time decide to use their vehicle as a deadly weapon against pedestrians or other drivers. Concur, or disagree?

 

[Badger]

Walking down a busy street with a weapon in your hand isn't exactly the norm in our current society and it causes concern because no one knows what is in your head,no one kniows if you are mentally impaired, intoxicicated on alcohol or drugs,no one knows your intent until an inquiry is made and the facts determined. That's what police do ,IT IS their duty toinvestigate anything unusual and out of place.
If you wife and child were walking down that same sidewalk at the same, you wouldn't be concerned?
You want the police to ignore what is going on around them until something bad happens, then you'd be shouting about the lousy cops and why they didn't do their job to prevent it.
I don't have to "be careful" what I saybecause I worked the system for 30+ years and I know it. I can't give you a legal education in a two minute paragrah. A police officer must weigh the safety of everyone else present against the temporary inconvenience of one.
There's nothing I can a say to make you see different because you have framed your mindset before you initially posted.
You asked a question and I answered it based on a lot of training and experience.
Too many court decisions to count have upheld police inquries and don't be ridiculous and ask me for court citations as I did'nt bother to write them all down just so I would have it on hand and it isn't worth my time to look it up for you.
I am retired and don't care what you do as long as it does not involve my family, I answered the question with the correct information trying to help you.
Your scenario says, you've broken no laws, done anything suspicious..you may have done a number of things that are suspicious to a trained observer..it is impossible to deal in vague hypotheticals with any accurracy.
YOU may not pose a threat to anyone but can you say with certainy, that if police ignore, and 12 others do the same thing that all (100%) of them mean no harm..no you can't and when a LEO sees you he can't either until he asks. You are looking at it as he is just trying to mess with you out of all the others out there and in reality he is trying to do his best to see that all of you are safe.
Do it your way, your decisions, your consequences; just try and keep others from being harmed in the process.
Now I am old and I'm tired I don't have a dog in this race, if you want more up to date info why not attend one of the free Citizen Police Academies that several area police depts. put on. Woodstock P.D. does it a couple times a year and I would think they have info on others if that one isn't close enough to you.
In the mean time, please be careful and don't get yourself in trouble by relying on information in varying site posts from self taught shade tree attorneys.

 

[jawjadawg]

I'm not going to get in any trouble. My original point was about an officer yanking a gun out of a vehicle to run the serial numbers without any justification. I was making the point that an officer should not have the right to take my rifle or shotgun from me if I am merely walking down the street with it. Why? Because there is nothing illegal about the activity.

I am also reading your words to imply you think it is perfectly legal for a police officer to stop and detain, any citizen, at any time, for any reason the officer deems appropriate. The last part is what matters - for any reason. What is the officer to do in that situation? They would be free to watch the individual and monitor actions to see if they break any laws, or even approach the individual to start a VOLUNTARY conversation to surmise their intent. Most people will just answer the officers questions - as I would be likely to do. Would the individual be obligated to answer their questions? I would argue no, and that once I asked if I was being detained or free to go then the conversation should end and the individual left to go about his business. Am I obligated to present a State ID to an officer who approaches me on the sidewalk? No, I am not. Then why would you think I would be obligated to give the officer any of my personal belongings?

The only significant event is the mere presence of a firearm. That, in and of itself, should not be construed, nor should it be legal cause, for an officer to detain an individual. Is it legal and reasonable for an officer to closely monitor that individual. Absolutely, and I expect and appreciate that an officer would feel the need to do so, but that is not the point at hand. There is a huge difference between paying attention to someone versus detaining them and removing their personal property because you've got a hunch. That's the bottom line, and the scenario I described above is legal activity and should not result in harassment from the authorities. That was my only point. Is that how it would work in reality? Probably not, which is really the only reason I happen to care.

Previous SCOTUS rulings are part of the problem, and have a lot to do with why the new gun laws were written. The new gun laws in this state were enacted to help restore our 2nd Amendment rights, not to adhere by previous twisted Supreme Court rulings.

 

[Badger]

I don't know how you are reading those things into what I said..I don't think thats what I meant at all.
I don't recall saying anywhere that you would be obligated to give over personal belongings without reason.
Perhaps I didn't phrase it properly or I wasn't reading you properly.
In your 1st para. you said you didn't think that a LEO should be able to remove the item from the car and check the number just because it was there..... absent any other reason..on that alone , face value..I agree.
In your last para. ref to my use of the word hunch..bad general semantics on my part as that having been my career field that word used loosely has an entirely different meaning for me than it does for you...my "hunches, instincts whatever you want to call them are calculations based on facts and observations that taken together and added to years of experience and training, make me believe further inquiry is warranted and I must be able to articulate that clearly to the court to justify any action that I took.
You also referenced that your statement was predicated upon merely presence on the street and the mere fact that you happen to be holding the firearm ,..again that and that alone with no other mitigitating circumstances involved..I would agree, the mere fact that you have one is not "reasonable suspicion" of any wrongdoing or bad intent without supporting articuable facts and observations .
We probably could have figured this out a lot faster over hot wings and cold beer at Taco Macs.
Just for the record, I don't just side with cops because I was one, there's a few of them out there today that don't read the books they are provided with but they are the FEW and eventually they get weeded out in a well organized and professional dept.
I just offer what little I can to try and help people understand what the LEO's consideration and point of view might have been at the time and maybe let some of the tension off as to why things may have happened the way they did.
Now that said, that doesn't mean they always make the right decision, if they did we wouldn't need courts...by the same token we all need to remember that neither do we and absent some clearly manifested action on the LEO's part that is just plain wrong and obvious,maybe we should try and give some benefit of doubt that he thinks he is doing the right thing...we expect it from them..we RIGHTLY expect them to give us the benefit of doubt that we are doing nothing wrong until we display some questionable conduct.
We really don't go around, or in my day didn't, just messing with people for no reason...even if we had wanted to, we simply
didn't have the time...we were plenty busy doing what we needed to do the way we were supposed to and we were very carefully scrutinized and constantly reviewed by upline supervisors.
The following para.is not directed at you at all, it's for everyone that reads it
I don't want to see ANYONE on here get themselves into trouble by listening to some of the posts (not this thread at all.. but I have seen some border threatening statements which doesn't do any gun owners or our positionon 2nd Amend any good at all ) and making challenges in the wrong place..the LEO, right or wrong, will win on the side of the road or in the street every time!!
Anyone that believes an LEO's conduct was not proper should go to his agency in person, file an official complaint with senior management and let Internal Affairs/Professional Standards investigate the matter.
If it wasn't offensive enough for you to follow that proceedure, then let it go, chalk it up to a bad day on everyone's part and forget about it, you'll be a much happier individual. , If it's worth pursuing, do it, as it will be doing everyone concerned a favor (you, the dept and the community..even the LEO involved).
Didn't mean to be so long winded, hope I've made it clearer and not offended you along the way.

 

[jawjadawg]

Yes, we agree. When cops aren't doing the right thing, then something needs to be done to make sure the problem is remedied. Otherwise, they continue doing the wring thing becauyse they think their actions are proper. Next thing you know, the entire department is doing the same thing, for years and years, and justifying those actions based on their years of training and experience.

 

[redwood87]

If I walked outside of my home (ak varient in tow), down the street and into my local shell store I would be shot dead by police on the way back home. I'd probably hover over my dead body and go, gun laws be damned.