Tenn. Trooper Steals Guns During Stop

[Bill of Rights]

I perfectly understand being offended by the biased anti cop statements. I've posted anti bad cop sentiments here, as well as giving accolades to cops who have gone above and beyond the call. It just irritates me that the ones who should be all for such things as video taping incidents, and law abiding citizens carrying guns, come here and defend those who have abused their duties, or get offended when the bad cops are called out for their reprehensible behavior. I'm not saying you have done any of these things, but why complain when someone posts something that points out this type of thing? I agree that, yes, if this guys guns were taken, then chances are there is more to the story than what we know, but until then, all we have to go is this story, and it sucks. I am a press brake operator, I supply a crew of 35 guys with parts to assemble into semi trailors, and mobile stages. I'm held accountable for what I do, so I make sure I do it right the first time. That is why I don't get it when cops defend the actions of a bad apple, because a bad apple with a badge can cause a lot bigger problem than a guy standing in front of a press brake.

I don't see the LEOs on here defending the trooper in the story, I see them saying (as I do) "Not enough info. Let's hear both sides and go from there."

This is what they do for a living. Given a situation where a woman in a store accuses you of groping her backside or of the store manager accusing you of theft, you're going to be expecting the cop that shows up to hear your side of the story, too, rather than just take the word of the store owner or the accuser and arrest and charge you, taking you away to a holding cell until the court hears your testimony on your own behalf.

They might (MIGHT stand with an accused officer at first, but God help the accused when any evidence comes out against him or her... because they sure won't.

I've told the story of a medic with whom I used to work. Hell of a skilled tech... She had an instinct for the job and cared not only for but also about her patients. When the accusation was made that she had pilfered narcotics from the truck stock and then from the supply cabinet, no one wanted to believe it. Her reply to the charges was that someone else had used her tech number to withdraw the meds and blame her, which was possible. Nonetheless, she was suspended. The pilfering stopped. Then she was caught at a local pharmacy with an altered prescription. She no longer had any defenders.

I'm not sure what she's doing now, but I know that with a felony record, she will never work in EMS again, which is a real loss for the patients and for any students she might have instructed along the way, but she knew the risks of her actions and took them anyway. I'm not proud of what happened to her, but I am proud to have known her for the short time she worked, and in no way do I defend her actions... just her skill.

The LEOs are similar, I think. They might think highly of the man or woman, but have no respect at all for his/her behavior in certain circumstances. Speaking for myself, I would consider it just if an officer guilty of what this trooper was accused received a similar punishment: No longer able to work as a LEO, anywhere, but that is predicated upon his/her guilt being established beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law... not upon a single accusation from the person who claims it happened to him.

There is reportedly no video of the incident taken by the citizen. If a LEO made an accusation against a citizen of some wrongdoing, would you accept his accusation at his word, without corroboration? No? The officer has sworn to uphold the law. What has the citizen taken an oath to do?

As has been said, don't be so quick to judge him guilty. If the report is completely truthful, I'd agree he is, but that's one hell of a big "if".

Blessings,
Bill

 

[samot]

Are you part of some anti-cop / anti-government forums where you keep getting these stories from? That's all you ever post about.

cmon guys
isnt that what the forum is for ??
IF YOU DONT FIND IT ENTERESTING OR INFORMATIVE THEN DONT POST IN HIS THREAD !!!!!!
Pretty sure it takes more effort to bash his thread then it would to just leve it alone

 

[Eddie]

Did some googling. There is a Trooper in Tennessee named Michael Loftis. Other than references to the blog entries there are some different news articles that name him. I couldn't find any other references to the gun incident outside of the blog entries.

 

[Rookie]

cmon guys
isnt that what the forum is for ??
IF YOU DONT FIND IT ENTERESTING OR INFORMATIVE THEN DONT POST IN HIS THREAD !!!!!!
Pretty sure it takes more effort to bash his thread then it would to just leve it alone

QFT

Repped

 

[IndyMonkey]

cmon guys
isnt that what the forum is for ??
IF YOU DONT FIND IT ENTERESTING OR INFORMATIVE THEN DONT POST IN HIS THREAD !!!!!!
Pretty sure it takes more effort to bash his thread then it would to just leve it alone

Because I see Mrj as no different than the evening news. He has an agenda and all his post has the same anti authority/cop slant.

He doesnt take an active roll in INGO,just the political part of it. Hes no different to me than someone that uses INGO for the classifieds. Sure, they are in the community but they are not part of the community.

 

[IndyMonkey]

Did some googling. There is a Trooper in Tennessee named Michael Loftis. Other than references to the blog entries there are some different news articles that name him. I couldn't find any other references to the gun incident outside of the blog entries.

THats odd because I could guarantee that if my weapons were taken illegally like the article claims it would be everywhere.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Why do these guys always talk to the cops so much?

 

[Bapak2ja]

Mrjarrell, the numbers of your posts may not bear out what esrice said, but the tone of your posts, the language you use, do give the impression that you are looking to find fault with their actions, both generally and specifically. It's a free country; you're welcome to have whatever opinion you want, just don't be surprised when your methods are taken how they come across. I'm not much for dogpiling someone, so I'm not jumping in where others have all said that you're anti-whatever. I am trying to explain, though, how it seems to me they got that impression.
You call them "enforcers": while technically correct, their job is to enforce the laws our elected representatives have passed, the word carries a more sinister connotation than, for example, "trooper" or even LEO.
You refer to the trooper as having "stolen" his property. I don't know about your neck of the woods, but I've yet to see a thief who gives a receipt for what he's taken.
The trooper was in the wrong, I agree, and if there's ever a court date, I'm sure that will be brought out.

One thing I'd like to point out because it's very important when dealing with the press (ANY press) and that is that there are three sides to every story: The other guy's, yours, and the truth. All we have here is the story of the man claiming to be victimized.

LEOs are not always right, obviously. Gun owners are similarly not always right.

I would be willing to bet, however, that had the citizen refused to answer or worse, lied to the trooper, or had he obstructed by one of those, "I do not consent to any searches" strategies, his property would still have been confiscated, he would still have been cited for his windows, but his car would have been impounded and he (and his wife, perhaps) arrested and charged. Maybe that would have been better from the perspective of liberty, but as it is now, according to his story, he remained fully cooperative, spoke intelligently regarding the law, and made his own case. He beat the "ride" before and now he stands a fair chance of beating the "rap" also.

Now, to be fair, I've given my layman's interpretation of the events, based on what I know of the FOPA and based on the citizen's report of what he did and where he was. I do not profess to be an attorney, nor is this post legal advice. As such, I welcome anyone who IS a J.D. to pick it apart and correct me wherever I may have erred.

As for your posts, mrjarrell, they do give the impression of being anti-LEO and/or anti-government to me as well. Perhaps that's not your intention. If not, I'd suggest taking a second look at your posts or maybe having someone else whose opinion you trust look them over and give you honest feedback on them.

These suggestions are not offered as a mod and don't carry anything more than my opinion. It's up to you whether or not you accept the opinion as worth some attention or not, and makes no difference to me either way. I just offered it with the intention of helping.

Blessings,
Bill

Well said. Clearly shows your intent to help, not belittle or denigrate. Often people fail to see "blind spots." It may be that this will help Mrarrell understand the point of the criticism.

 

[Hornett]

Why do these guys always talk to the cops so much?

However, the officer asked him point-blank "Do you have any drugs or weapons in the car?
How do you address that without admitting there are guns?
When the Dan Howley said he did in fact have a gun in the trunk the officer then said get out of the car and open the trunk.
At that point, right there, you know it is going to go bad.
I think that is the perfect time to say "Get a warrant. I won't answer any further questions."
Can I do that? I don't think it's too late. Is it?

Another thing that bugs me is that even though Dan Howley stated two different times that permits were not required in Colorado, he never told the officer that there was a federal law allowing transport through different states to a destination outside of that state. If he had, maybe, possibly, things would have turned out differently.

Dog or no dog, I would have to see a warrant before they did a search of my car.

To address MrJarrell starting these threads...
I really hadn't noticed who starts the threads.
The reason I read these threads is not to bash police officers, I want to learn how to avoid trouble.
I know that the officers are doing a job and I want to help them do their job first and foremost.
I learn more about the law and what not to do in these types of threads than anywhere else.
It is really regretful that people turn these into cop bashing threads and it is really not necessary.

 

[malern28us]

Because I see Mrj as no different than the evening news. He has an agenda and all his post has the same anti authority/cop slant.

He doesnt take an active roll in INGO,just the political part of it. Hes no different to me than someone that uses INGO for the classifieds. Sure, they are in the community but they are not part of the community.

I dont think the OP needs another mother or father in his life. If you see he started a thread and you dont like the topic, skip it.
Nothing worse than a self appointed thread moderator.
Post falls within guidlines and no mod has closed thread.
I treat it as any other post. I read it, decide what might be true, and investigate further myself if I find it hard believe or have further questions.
Please dont be hard on someone that posts headlines, even if they tend to be or appear slanted. I just appreciate it for what it is. A topic.

 

[serpicostraight]

i dont see the problem with people posting articles as long as they are the truth. if the truth gets somebodys panties in a wad maybe they need to change thier morals. and as far as bashing leo goes theres a very simple fix for that dont give people a reason and they wont. these are not stories someone sets at home and makes up they are gasp real life. when anybody from any other walk of life screws up theres no problem with everybody voicing thier opinion. leo are no different if they screw up let them take the heat they deserve. maybe thats why alot of them think they are better than mere mortals because so many people refuse to admit they are human and make mistakes too.

 

[public servant]

I say let them post it...as long as it's true. They are entitled to their opinions. It's obvious a handful have an axe to grind.

Take serpicostraight for example. He was thrown in jail for getting trashed at a bar and passing out in his car. He says he was found not guilty of the charges and I have no reason to doubt it. Had they been smart and charged him merely with public intoxication he have been found guilty.

And now he has an axe to grind. It's obvious what his feelings are about the police. He voices them regularly. No big deal. Most of the people here realize what he and the others are doing and they are free to take it for what it's worth.

It's like his last post about the police thinking they are better than mere mortals. His opinion. Who cares.

I say let them have at it.

While I'd like to see the blatant bashing stop...it won't. In my opinion at least it lends comedic value.

I do however reserve the right to respond to their posts.

And for the record...I've made plenty of mistakes. I have not however...had my drunken butt hauled off to jail.

 

[serpicostraight]

I say let them post it...as long as it's true. They are entitled to their opinions. It's obvious a handful have an axe to grind.

Take serpicostraight for example. He was thrown in jail for getting trashed at a bar and passing out in his car. He says he was found not guilty of the charges and I have no reason to doubt it. Had they been smart and charged him merely with public intoxication he have been found guilty.

And now he has an axe to grind. It's obvious what his feelings are about the police. He voices them regularly. No big deal. Most of the people here realize what he and the others are doing and they are free to take it for what it's worth.

It's like his last post about the police thinking they are better than mere mortals. His opinion. Who cares.

I say let them have at it.

While I'd like to see the blatant bashing stop...it won't. In my opinion at least it lends comedic value.

I do however reserve the right to respond to their posts.

And for the record...I've made plenty of mistakes. I have not however...had my drunken butt hauled off to jail.

and you probably never will the thin blue line gang sticks together look at bissard and katrina just to name a few.

 

[public servant]

and you probably never will the thin blue line gang sticks together look at bissard and katrina just to name a few.

And here I thought it was because I was smart enough not to get hammered when I go out in public.

If I want to tie one on....I'll do it at home. That's because I'm cheap though. It kills me to pay that much for beer in a bar.

I always limit myself to two beers if I'm out. And if I drink ANYTHING with alcohol in it...I don't drive. I let someone who hasn't been drinking drive. Always have a designated driver...it keeps you out of jail. Or at least it has worked for me.

 

[IndyMonkey]

and you probably never will the thin blue line gang sticks together look at bissard and katrina just to name a few.

Thin blue lines exist in every group From your family to any kind of occupation that has a brotherhood or friendship.

I'm sorry you have not experienced this as it is kickass when you know someone has your back.

 

[IndyMonkey]

I'm still waiting for mrj to post something to give this thread some creditability.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

My point is that we are only getting one side of the very slanted story. Many people like to take the slanted stories as fact and run with them. A good example is the Las Vegas Cosco shooting. It seems that there was much more to the deceased mans life than being a West Point Grad.

I have said before and I will say it again, No one is harder on bad,corrupt,dishonest or ignorant LEO's than other LEO's. In this line of work your reputation means a lot. You get a bad reputation in this job you might as well just resign. And your fellow LEO's are always listening and watching. LEO's tend to be a unforgiving group for their own bad apples. At the same time they are also fiercely loyal. Probably more so than any other occupation.

I've witnessed this from the outside, working with various law enforcement agencies and officers over a number of years. I'd say that the idea that police tend to "cover for their own" is just about balanced by the fact that arrestees will often lie about both their behavior and the police's behavior if they think they will get a sympathetic hearing. And, from some folks, they often do. No reporter that I ever had any dealings with got the story 100% correct; when they're operating on "hearsay" from a "victim", I take a story with a great big shaker of salt.

And yes, mrjarrell, you do come across as someone who doesn't like cops and any sort of government.

 

[Andy219]

This thread is missing something... I know it's missing this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYLsyNBnE5M

 

[Wild Deuce]

... I'm sorry you have not experienced this as it is kickass when you know someone has back.

Having your "back" is great but not when it forces you to compromise the Truth or doing what is Right. I think that compromise is made often enough to make a lot of people leery of the men in blue. Chicago PD comes to mind.

Things would be so much better if these men and women would start to view themselves as Peace Officers instead of Law Enforcement Officers. It might start to cut away some of the badge heavy mentality that is prevalent in law enforcement.

... I'd say that the idea that police tend to "cover for their own" is just about balanced by the fact that arrestees will often lie about both their behavior and the police's behavior ...

This is pretty sad that we would think this way. There should be NO balance whatsoever. The number of lying arrestees should completely overwhelm the number of "cover their own" police officers.


mrjarrell, keep on posting and I'll be happy to make up my own mind if it has any merit.

 

[IndyMonkey]

This thread is missing something... I know it's missing this:

<object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RYLsyNBnE5M?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0&amp;border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RYLsyNBnE5M?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0&amp;border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object>

No there's plenty of failure from the first post.