Stopped by Terre Haute PD for OC'ing -- On a Date!

[Bill of Rights]

Very well said, however, I can't help but wonder if the same person PM'd Unit308 and pointed out HIS errors...

I don't know or care. Not my problem. I'm responsible for myself and my words, and here, for ensuring that Fenway's "house rules" are followed. It's not a violation of any INGO rule (other than VUPDBlue's Rule #1 ) to have a differing opinion.

I think you're wrong. Unit308's view is to entirely disregard the Fourth Amendment and do whatever he wants. Unit308's view is thus illegal, which makes him a criminal for doing that. The Supreme Court of Indiana has already said that once you show your LTCH, you can no longer be detained unless some other suspicion exists.

Indiana, as far as I know, has full preemption. Some village ordinance prohibiting carry in parks is, as far as I know, illegitimate. OP wasn't doing anything illegal.

Defending dirty cops who violate the Fourth Amendment, admit to doing so in an open forum, hassle law-abiding gun owners, and do so under some perceived privilege that they can carry openly but we can't, is ridiculous.

If I was stopped by Unit308 and he behaved like he says he would, and I could show that he posted that in the open forum ahead of time, and then did it, I'd have a great lawsuit. It might be an instance where I could even sue him individually....where the taxpayers wouldn't pay, he would.

Police officers know, or should know, and are required to know, when they can legally stop someone they've confronted. Having a handgun is not evidence that one is "armed and dangerous." Obviously they're armed. But once they show a LTCH, absent some suspicious activity, they should be free to go. Officers, even if ignorant, who violate this, should be liable--individually.

DZ, the OP did violate the local ordinance re: parks. IN does have pre-emption, however it is not full, it's limited: Some laws are grandfathered in (like the one that's not enforced in Speedway) and counties, townships, and municipalities can restrict carry, etc. on property they own or manage.

The remainder of your post would apply if that wasn't true, but it is and thus, the officer's actions were legit.

That said, however, I do agree that when they step outside of their sworn duties and use the power behind the badge to exceed their authority, they should be called on the carpet for it, just like anyone else is in their job.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Post deleted due to having a bad day ...

 

[mrjarrell]

Hate to say it, but this thread could be closed anytime...

Doubtful. It hasn't strayed into forbidden areas or bashing. This has actually been quite a civil thread, by and large.

 

[VUPDblue]

Hate to say it, but this thread could be closed anytime...

Yep, it's right on the verge. Thanks for proving me wrong guys (you know who you are)

 

[samot]

I have a tendency to agree with the THPD on this one and to disagree with Mr. Youngblood.
I have dealt with very similar situations over the years, so I speak from experience.
While carrying openly is legal (with a CCW Permit) it is not advisable.
Since Mr. Youngblood was at a venue where there were crowds all around, and since I doubt that he has been trained in weapons retention, I can see the possibility of someone coming up from behind him and "snatching" his handgun.
This young man probably has no inkling that there are prisoners in our institutions who compare notes and even rehearse how to snatch a handgun from a police officer's holster. He would be "easy pickings" for some of these types.
It has also been my experience that it is often the newly licensed who carry openly. Why? In my opinion it is because they like to "show off" and in many cases rather enjoy the attention/intimidation factor that carrying openly results in.
Mister Youngblood could have saved himself (and his date) a lot of time and embarrassment by simply concealing his handgun, but, judging from his numerous posts, I stand by my statement that he is enjoying the attention. It further sounds as if he was not embarrassed at all.
Oh, and for the record, officers can check for valid CCW permits. It is not unheard of that a CCW license has been revoked at the State level, so the mere possession of that little piece of pink paper is not indicative of the fact that the carrier of same has a clean and clear record.

And on a personal level? I wonder why a gal would want to go out on a date/dates with someone who openly carries a handgun and who seems to enjoy and, indeed, invite his confrontations with law officers?
Had that been myself who responded to this situation, and had I the City Ordinance to issue a citation, and had this young man argued with me at length, I would have.
The responding officers handled this situation very well and exercised what we refer to as "officer discretion".
And yes, the officers had every lawful right to ask this young man to unload and temporarily surrender his weapon. They had no idea of whom they were confronting.
Again, had that been myself, I would have not trusted this young man to even touch his weapon, much less remove the magazine. I would have asked him to raise his arms while I removed it and made it safe. You know...officer safety?

This is some classic , im a cop & no one else is profesional enough to carry a firearm BS!
"had that been myself, I would have not trusted this young man to even touch his weapon, much less remove the magazine. I would have asked him to raise his arms while I removed it and made it safe"
because your safty is paramount

Do ya violate everyone carrying a six pack & detain/ harass them till ya "check em out"

[B"]And on a personal level? I wonder why a gal would want to go out on a date/dates with someone who openly carries a handgun and who seems to enjoy and, indeed, invite his confrontations with law officers?"
This is really nice, not only are you talking down to the OP but your saying his date is a dumbbutt too!!
I assume everyone you pull over in a camero for speeding has an ignorant passenger sitting next to them, since their dumb enuf to be in a performance vehicle that "invites confrontations with law officers"
I doubt that he has been trained in weapons retention, I can see the possibility of someone coming up from behind him and "snatching" his handgun.
weapons retention .....Rite !!
ill bet the farm 99% of people on this forum that carry havnt had thier sidearm touched by anyone while carrying other than by an LEO
I enjoy how its always the civys fault
I love cops

 

[downzero]

I don't know or care. Not my problem. I'm responsible for myself and my words, and here, for ensuring that Fenway's "house rules" are followed. It's not a violation of any INGO rule (other than VUPDBlue's Rule #1 ) to have a differing opinion.



DZ, the OP did violate the local ordinance re: parks. IN does have pre-emption, however it is not full, it's limited: Some laws are grandfathered in (like the one that's not enforced in Speedway) and counties, townships, and municipalities can restrict carry, etc. on property they own or manage.

The remainder of your post would apply if that wasn't true, but it is and thus, the officer's actions were legit.

That said, however, I do agree that when they step outside of their sworn duties and use the power behind the badge to exceed their authority, they should be called on the carpet for it, just like anyone else is in their job.

Blessings,
Bill

I'm actually not sure on your reading of the statute. I think there are tremendous problems with vagueness if a municipality isn't going to put up a sign and they just expect to send police officers to arrest everyone who walks into the park. That may very well be a political problem with the legislature, though.

Perhaps what it comes down to is that our preemption isn't strong enough. And threads like this are full of reasons why I carry concealed.

 

[Expat]

I'm actually not sure on your reading of the statute. I think there are tremendous problems with vagueness if a municipality isn't going to put up a sign and they just expect to send police officers to arrest everyone who walks into the park.

Certainly Bill hasn't had 2 weeks of law school but I have always found him to be pretty sharp and able to comprehend what he reads. I may not always agree with him but I feel confident in his ability to read a city ordinance.

 

[mk2ja]

Uh, no. he asked for PICTURES, not audio.

I know! I know! It's all I've got, though! Trust me, Date #2 will for sure include pics so I can prove it to ya.

Unit308 gives us "youngblood" 308ers a bad rap...

OP, you did a GREAT job maintaining composure. I would be pissed beyond belief having my pistol tapped. You also did well in not engaging unit308 in childish name calling.

CC or OC...who cares. Just glad you choose to carry and continue holding steadfast in exercising your right. +1 to you.

Thanks for the encouragement, jake.

On a side note, did the date get to see your rifle too.

Heh, heh... well, you know... some things are better left undressed.

Er, I mean, unaddressed!

+1 on the post and good luck on #2.

Hmm, maybe you could take her to the range and teach her to shoot? (Hey, we could have another debate about whether she can use your handgun at the range with you present and instructing her if she doesn't have a LTCH!)

Oh trust me, the wheels are already working on how to make that work! Conversation during the evening led me to believe that she'd be interested in learning more about shooting.

 

[Expat]

Yep, it's right on the verge. Thanks for proving me wrong guys (you know who you are)

I have been gone all day... what did I say earlier

 

[IndyMonkey]

Certainly Bill hasn't had 2 weeks of law school but I have always found him to be pretty sharp and able to comprehend what he reads. I may not always agree with him but I feel confident in his ability to read a city ordinance.

That's not fair to dz, I think he is actually in his 3rd week.

 

[Expat]

That's not fair to dz, I think he is actually in his 3rd week.

Thank you for the correction, I certainly would not want to be accused of mischaracterizing his experience in legal matters.

 

[VUPDblue]

one more and it's done....

 

[mk2ja]

Replying to posts up through page 4 (at 40 posts per page)

And OP, we need of the young lady. This is non-negotiable.

Blessings,
Bill

I'll get 'em posted when I can! I promise! All I could post now would be things from Facebook, so I don't really wanna do that. I'll get pics next time I see her, though.

'Course there weren't any girls at Rose when I went, either, so not ALL change is bad!

Congrats on your encounter, congrats on graduating from Rose, and congrats on getting a second date!

Yes, having girls at Rose has come in quite handy. (Alright, alright, yes, I didn't mean it like that... let it go, folks )

Thanks!

I can't believe the OP didn't give THE answer... the one with the absolute perfect opening.. I mean, this one is right up there with the joke about the rectum stretcher!

Cop: "Why are you carrying that? (indicating pistol)"

OP: "Because you guys're too heavy and tend to get upset when I try to pick you up on my shoulders!"

LOL! Yep, this has definitely been a great learning experience! I'll be much better prepared next time I'm stopped!

I would hate to think what could have happened had the OP been trained in weapon retention & had reacted instinctively when he felt "someone" touch his weapon.

If he had, I am guessing that this incident would have ended very differently (ie tragically).

I didn't make it clear earlier, and perhaps I should have, but before the first cop tapped my sidearm with his flashlight, I did see him approaching. So it wasn't a total surprise such as, "Holy crap! Somebody's touching my weapon!" I knew a cop was on his way up to me, and he began speaking at just about the same time as the taps came, so the taps weren't the initial "greeting". Yes, it upset me that he touched it, but more on principle than on poor execution.

 

[mk2ja]

I feel kind of bad that THPD hassled you but I do think you at least avoided a fine in the end. Grats on getting to the second date!

P.S. does she have a cute friend

Haha, well, I'm sure she does. Available? I have no idea! If I find out something that might be helpful to you, though, I'll let ya know *makes that sound with the corner of the mouth that sounds like cocking a gun while making the motion of cocking a gun with your fingers*

Sir, you underestimate "Mr. Youngblood." He has good situational awareness and is alert to guarding his weapon. He does not have your experience, but he knows the basics and is as able as anyone to retain his weapon. He is consistently practicing what he does know and seeking to learn more. He took the time to learn the laws of Indiana and Terre Haute and obeys them. He expects the LEO to do the same. He is young, and a bit cocky, but he is good kid. Makes his father proud of him.

Thanks for your advice on this matter. It helps us all think through the issues. I know many disagreed with you, but I appreciate your willingness to speak clearly on the issues.

Thanks, Daaadddddd..... haha

Sarah Irish

Whoa, that's way cool. Nope, not her, though. My date was more purdy!

I like how you concluded...date #2

Hehe, thanks, sis!

 

[alfahornet]

Great Thread - I feel the officers handled it pretty well considering an actual infraction was committed

 

[Bapak2ja]

No.

It's true he presented a point of view held by some LEOs. Those who hold that view need to be aware that there is an ever growing number of citizens who will no longer tolerate their disrespect for the law, the Constitution, and the citizens they serve.

You agree that "some LEOs" hold that view. More hold that view than I would like. So, I believe that is sufficient to term it a commonly held view. I share your opinion that we would like for more LEOs to recognize we the people will no longer tolerate their abuse of their office.

 

[mk2ja]

Indiana, as far as I know, has full preemption. Some village ordinance prohibiting carry in parks is, as far as I know, illegitimate. OP wasn't doing anything illegal.

I think that the IC I posted earlier (see quoted post below) covers that. Since the park is owned and/or administered by the city, the city has authority in the Indiana Code to prohibit firearms there. And, according to the section I posted from the Terre Haute City Code earlier still, it does appear that Terre Haute exercises that authority and has prohibits firearms in city parks. So, unfortunately, I was, in fact, in violation of the City Code, and I'm very thankful that they decided not to issue me a ticket.

IC 35-47-11
Chapter 11. Local Regulation of Firearms
Link: Indiana Code 35-47-11

 

[Bapak2ja]

Isn't that kind of contradicting your self?

I do not think so, sir. I gave Unit 308 the benefit of the doubt that he has more training than mk2ja. But I do know the mk2ja has only been at this for about eighteen months and has spent a lot of time researching the law, training with experts and practicing what he has learned. I do not see this as contradictory.

 

[Bapak2ja]

Bapak2ja, I've said it once, I'll say it again....

You've raised one heck of an outstanding son there.

Thanks, Indy! He does make me proud to be known as his father.

 

[mk2ja]

And threads like this are full of reasons why I carry concealed.

I've CC'd many a time in the parks. I think this was the first time I've OC'd in one, and it just happened to be at an event with a police presence. Poor timing. In the future, though, I won't OC if I go into a Terre Haute park -- that's for sure.