Well, and let me say I don't disagree w/you. : ) My point is that "yes" the LEO may have very well be mistaken but your not going to be able to discuss that with him at that point in time. LEO's are trained to take control and that they have authority. (I'm sure you know this already) I'm just saying that the time in place to take it up w/anyone is in court or w/there superior and not at the time. It's not that were guilty or wrong but the officer obviously believes he has reasonable cause to disarm so we really have to comply even if we think he's making a mistake.K.Mooneyham wrote:I have to disagree with you on principle. Now, let me preface that by saying I personally would have "surrendered" the firearm when asked, I do not want to be shot or go to jail. That being said, a good many of us do not have money to run to court over any little thing. If I were pressed to come up with the money because it was something serious, then I would. But it would hurt my family, for certain. Human beings make mistakes, it is impossible not to make mistakes. And if said mistake leads to interaction with an improperly or under-informed LEO that we aren't even allowed to question on the subject, then are we automatically in the wrong? Isn't that tantamount to guilty until proven innocent, unless you can afford to go to court to prove otherwise? I'm sorry, but that seems like a bad thing. I am not advocating for criminals; I have not, and do not plan on doing bad stuff to others, in fact I've had exactly one speeding ticket in my life to this point, in Sherman in 1993. I'm not talking of belligerently arguing with law enforcement, but simply about asking questions, etc. And, I do not want this taken as an attack on LEOs because I am not doing so. I am speaking about a mindset, a overall viewpoint.pcgizzmo wrote:Totally agree. Lesson to be learned assuming it went down as the officer said. If an officer asks you for your gun whether you think he's right or not at this point in time you need to act like he's right and take it up in court or you could be taking up with your maker as the man in this story unfortunately is. There is no arguing w/a police officer. You will never win. Best to do what they say and work it out later.A-R wrote:longtooth wrote:Had a class yesterday & in last night about 9:00 so I am late to this party.
When you start this from square 1 & the basic simplest points that cannot be argued or oppinionated this is pretty cut/dried to me.
1. The law says nothing about a LEO having the right to disarm. It says they have the authority to disarm. For the officer to ASK for the weapon was a great show of trust in itself.
2 As soon as he refused that is an offence in itself. Refusing to obey the LAWFUL order of a Piece Officer.
Whether anyone agrees or not w/ him reaching for the gun, I still see that as a last gesture of trust.
He could have drawn his own weapon of taser & called for all backup. Roughly put the guy on the ground & taken the weapon.
If a person refuses ANY lawful order & the officer "lets it go" then from that time on the person is in control & not the officer.
Great points.
I've never seen situation where trying to get an officer to think through his course of action has changed his mind not that it might not have happened. I have seen a situation where complying goes a lot better for the citizen than it could have gone if they had not.