Whew, ten pages (and counting!) of back and forth.
I sincerely doubt the notion that EEllis is a Law Enforcement Officer. The thing is, while the courts do recognize the subjectivity of an officer's observations on a stop, and take them into account during deliberations of what is reasonable or not, it remains that the officer has to have a little thing called "articulable facts" to back up Reasonable Suspicion. A man standing on a street corner with a rifle in hand or slung counts as an articulable fact. I, as the responding officer, can articulate that we received a call of a man with a rifle, and I observed a man with a rifle.
Now, if openly carrying a rifle is NOT a crime, then I have an articulable fact that goes nowhere. The fact supports a legal conclusion. Legally, I can do nothing against him. As a gunnie, I may walk up to him to ask what it is, and keep my eyes/ears open just in case he -might- be doing something, but I have absolutely zero justification to detain him, place him in cuffs, take his gun, or search his pockets. If he says he doesn't want to talk to me, and walks away, I can legally do nothing, no matter how rude or confrontational his attitude may be, no matter whether or not I think he's showing "contempt of cop."
If I receive a report that he aimed the rifle at someone, that would warrant a more serious investigation, request for ID, what is he doing, etc. A report that he fired the weapon would step it up another notch. Him aiming the weapon at me takes it even further. But none of this happened.
By the way, a Terry frisk is indeed a frisk for weapons, if the officer reasonably believes it is necessary for his safety. A man with a rifle, engaged in legal, lawful activity, is not reasonable justification. Nor, since he's HOLDING A RIFLE, is that justification to search for a pistol! I already know he's armed, and if he was going to do something, would he waste time with drawing a pistol when the rifle's already out and ready? No, of course not. Therefore, if I cannot justify drawing my own gun and pointing it at him while he drops the rifle, I cannot justify a Terry search; I'm obviously not all that worried about the rifle.
Terry frisks are not intended to find identification. It's not a search for contraband, or a wallet, or money. Yes, these are found during Terry frisks, but that's incidental to the search; a NAA Mini revolver is a lot smaller than a wallet, so if I pat someone down looking for a gun that tiny, or a pocketknife, of course I'm going to find the wallet. But a pat-down for a wallet isn't kosher.
Therefore, with this guy in question, if the officer didn't have reason to draw his gun for the rifle the guy was holding, there was no reason to go through his pockets, and no reason to go through his wallet.
For the record, yes, I am an LEO. Yes, rude confrontations with people displaying "contempt of cop" drive me nuts. No, I can't, and won't, do anything about it except wish them a good day, and move on. I certainly won't make up any fake "laws" or "charges," or declare that the law doesn't matter. I've been on the bad end of a bogus search as a teenager. I've been the guy staring at the badge of an arrogant or overconfident cop who thought he had a "sure thing" arrest, when all he had was straw, and no wrongdoing or crime ever committed. I've also been the guy with a bit of a bad attitude toward said cop, and laughed in his face when he found nothing where there was nothing.
Any officer who is unable to act courteously in the face of contempt, or who believes "badge makes right," needs to leave this line of work yesterday. Anyone who supports that kind of officer, well, I can fairly well guarantee your support for them will fade if you ever wind up the recipient of said officer's tender courtesies, and you'll realize there's a reason for the restrictions placed upon us, the authority we wield, and how we can - and cannot - use it.
