Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Battle Monkey of Zardoz on October 12, 2010, 10:24:27 PM
-
You are subjects. Your PD thinks you need to be controlled.
Me thinks the citizens need to have a "chat" with their elected critters
http://www.cityofmadison.com/news/view.cfm?news_id=2231
-
a group of about 500 to a thousand peaceful legal open carry folk all over town would be problematic for him .... wouldn't it?
-
It sure would. And that was along the lines of "the chat" I mentioned. The PDs position on this offends me, and re enforces the police view the citizens as subjects.
-
oh how awkward.... i don't know how to say this any other way.....
i agree. now this is one of those times when i group like oath keepers could really pull the tigers tail. get enough folks involved get a good number of leo to carry in amongst the crowd it would truly ruin the chiefs day
-
This is all because Police Chiefs are appointed and not elected by the PEOPLE. If the Police Chief was accountable to the public, he might of had a different ruling.
-
What ticks me off, I mean really effing ticks me off:
From the Article:
Approach the suspect using the proper tactical response. The individual should be contacted, controlled, and frisked for weapons if appropriate. Officers should separate the suspect from any weapons in his/her possession during the encounter
Why? Unless a crime has been or is about to be committed, a cop has no reason what so ever to even approach a person who is open carrying.
Officers should verify that the firearm is not stolen, and attempt to verify that the person possessing the firearm is not legally barred from doing so (as a felon, due to an injunction, etc.). However, someone who has been detained is not legally obligated to provide identification to officers if no criminal ordinance violations have occurred. A person who refuses to provide identification should not be arrested for obstructing; however, if probable cause for another offense exists the suspect should be arrested for that offense and can then be identified during the citation or booking process
See above.
When responding to incidents involving subjects openly carrying firearms in public places, officers should investigate to determine whether the suspect's actions caused or were likely to cause a disturbance. The primary factors to be considered include the location, time of day and witness/bystander perceptions. Remember that the disorderly conduct statute does not require that an actual disturbance take place, only that the conduct in question be of a type that tends to cause or provoke a disturbance.
Someone needs to challange that law, its a little vague and gives open license to arrest and cite for no crime at all.
The only person here that needed to be arrested or cited for DC, is the bedwetter who called the police about abunch of people legally carring their firearms according to state law.
-
This is all because Police Chiefs are appointed and not elected by the PEOPLE. If the Police Chief was accountable to the public, he might of had a different ruling.
Agreed...that's why I like the sheriff system (elected)......
-
By subject, are you referring to the practice of referring to people as "subject" in police reports and such? Which of course means the person is the subject of the investigation, and is also used to substitute for names, which precludes officers from having to write someone's possibly long name over and over.
I really don't know how to politely express the fact that people who think using the word "subject" in a police report is equal to a "king's subjects" are essentially batshiat insane. If you really are so anarchist-paranoid that you glean police reports looking for terms that make you feel disparaged, the kind of help you need isn't something I'm qualified to give. I would suggest medication and the observation of a professional.
-
Madison WI isn't the only place in WI that's open carry haters. Most of WI is that way. Hell, even in MN, some of the cops are that way and open carry is allowed there, too (with a permit).
-
Relax, folks. Wisconsin Carry and the loose confederation of gun-nuts at OpenCarry dot Org are so on top of this. Mass open carry events? Check. Opportunities for the cops to blatantly violate Constitutional and civil rights? Check. Lawsuits filed? Check. Wisconsin Attorney General's Opinion already issued on their side? Check. Wins in previous lawsuits regarding similar behavior by other city's cops? Check
Did I mention that one of the guys being cited for DC was the plaintiff in the prior lawsuit in an adjoining city?
These folks are pretty darned profesional for a grassroots bunch.
stay safe.
-
Now that I am OC Only I spend an equal amount of time on OCDO (http://forum.opencarry.org/) and LOCAL (http://www.laopencarry.org/)!
-
Relax, folks. Wisconsin Carry and the loose confederation of gun-nuts at OpenCarry dot Org are so on top of this. Mass open carry events? Check. Opportunities for the cops to blatantly violate Constitutional and civil rights? Check. Lawsuits filed? Check. Wisconsin Attorney General's Opinion already issued on their side? Check. Wins in previous lawsuits regarding similar behavior by other city's cops? Check
Did I mention that one of the guys being cited for DC was the plaintiff in the prior lawsuit in an adjoining city?
These folks are pretty darned profesional for a grassroots bunch.
stay safe.
This is pretty much it.
All that pontificating by the MPD and the City of Madison is just digging themselves deeper for the black eye and lawsuit that's to come. =D
And if a Madison municipal judge is stubborn enough to wrongfully convict, the lawsuit will be even BETTER, and then it goes up to the WI Circuit Court judge, for some actual case law....
Just in time for the newly seated legislature AND Governor (which both shows a very good chance of tipping back in our favor) to take up our fourth (fifth?) and hopefully FINAL attempt at a good shall-issue Concealed Carry law here in WI.
The more belligerent they are, the more Madison is just walking into the trap that's been set for them.
-
By subject, are you referring to the practice of referring to people as "subject" in police reports and such? Which of course means the person is the subject of the investigation, and is also used to substitute for names, which precludes officers from having to write someone's possibly long name over and over.
There was no crime
-
not all police reports deal with a crime
-
not all police reports deal with a crime
Technically, the DC or DTP they were charged with is a civil forfeiture.
-
There was no crime
So?
-
Just in time for the newly seated legislature AND Governor (which both shows a very good chance of tipping back in our favor) to take up our fourth (fifth?) and hopefully FINAL attempt at a good shall-issue Concealed Carry law here in WI.
Leaving just us down in Greater Daleygrad without.
-
So, you think nothing that the LE did was wrong. NO crime, nothing but a bedwetting citizen. Then an internal memo telling officers how to "get around" the law.
Remember this (me thinks we will see it in WI):
The court stated that “the firearm alone did not create a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity”. The court went on to state that the “Defendants (LEO) had no legitimate reason to engage Mr. St. John in the first place”, also the “Defendants (LEO) had no reason for seizing Mr. St. John”, “Mr. St. John had done nothing to arouse suspicion”.
The judge did rule that the Defendants (LEO) did violate Mr. St. John’s Fourth Amendment rights.
Lastly and the best part of this case was that the judge stated that the “Defendants (LEO) motion for summary judgment is denied with regard to qualified immunity”.
In short, the LEOs can be sued....This ruling means that the law enforcement officers will have to think about what they are doing and begin to make sound judgment and not act on impulse. They will have to take responsibility for their action and/ or maybe face a lawsuit....
I thought this decision was interesting because this court goes even further to address the “community caretaker function” of the police and that it may be invoked as a defense only so long as the officer is entitled to make a forcible stop. Merely receiving a call from a hypersensitive person that someone is armed where it is lawful to be armed, is not reason enough to believe anyone’s safety is in danger in the absence of any suspicious or threatening behavior. This seems to me to be the big disconnect with law enforcement training. The 911 operators need to ask more questions of the caller to determine if there is any criminal activity before sending out one or more officers. In this case, Mr. St. John was in a theater watching a preview to a movie, a perfectly legal activity. The responding officers should have been trained to discern the difference between unlawful activity and a person quietly watching a movie.
and
From:
http://reason.com/blog/2009/09/16/court-victory-against-police-i
Sounds like the police up in WI need a slapping.
-
IIRC, either the Attorney General of WI stated or there is Case Law that OC in and of itself is does not rise to the level of DC.
I'm in Wheaton (Western 'burb of Chicago). I can be behind the Cheddar Curtain in about an hour to help with an open carry march/rally/dining in. ;)
-
IIRC, either the Attorney General of WI stated or there is Case Law that OC in and of itself is does not rise to the level of DC.
I'm in Wheaton (Western 'burb of Chicago). I can be behind the Cheddar Curtain in about an hour to help with an open carry march/rally/dining in. ;)
Joyfully, it is both.
stay safe.
-
Yep, both. IIRC, the AG's opinion was posted right after we got a court ruling slamming West Allis PD for arresting someone for OCing on their own property...
But Madison is a small region surrounded by reality, yet untouched by it...
-
Battle Monkey; do you have any idea what I'm talking about? I mean do you know what exactly my comments are focused on? In your thread title and original post, you postulated that the people of Madison are "subjects to be controlled", such as the "subjects" of a King or Queen. I asked if you assumed this because the police used the term "subject" in their reports. You did not answer me. I am telling you that if that is what you are assuming, you are incorrect. Police use the term "subject" because it means "subject of the report" or "subject of the investigation". I assume you took middle school English classes. You remember "the subject of the sentence?" As in, the noun the sentence and verb is about? Same principle. The subject of an investigation is the person the investigation focuses on. Using the word subject also allows police to save time and space on the reports by only using the person's name once, such as "Mohammed Yassir Abu Hamza" in the "Subject Name:" box on the report, and then just write "subject" from that point on.
Lastly, I state that the aforementioned real reasons behind police using the term subject should be obvious to anyone. And that anyone who ignores the simplest explanation and instead assumes that the police are really using the word "subject" in the "King's subject" sense as some form of power-tripping, is probably so paranoid as to be suffering a true chemical imbalance and should seek psychological assistance
-
I assume you don't understand sarcasm, snark. Feel free to see your doctor for your imbalance or just consult your dictionary / thesaurus. Sarcasm my boy. Look it up. Also look up subject, suspect and bystander. In my english class, as well as my LE education, all have very different meanings.
subject (plural subjects)
1.(grammar) In a clause: the word or word group (usually a noun phrase) that is dealt with. In active clauses with verbs denoting an action, the subject and the actor are usually the same.
“In the sentence ‘The mouse is eaten by the cat in the kitchen.’, ‘The mouse’ is the subject, ‘the cat’ being the agent.”
2.The main topic of a paper, work of art, discussion, etc.
3.A particular area of study.
Her favorite subject is physics.
4.A citizen in a monarchy.
I am a British subject.
5.A person ruled over by another, especially a monarch or state authority.
-
And your initial post and topic gives the impression you think the police are using definition 5 when they use the word subject. You are wrong.
-
Oh well. If that's the impression you take, your problem. Sarcasm, my boy.
-
You are subjects. Your PD thinks you need to be controlled.
Me thinks the citizens need to have a "chat" with their elected critters
Can anyone else point out exactly where the obvious sarcasm is in those 3 sentences?
-
Again. Sarcasm.
A subject is controlled by a higher authority. The folks in WI were open carrying, legally per WI law. Now you would think a WI police officer would be knowledgeable of the law, especially where weapons are concerned. What should have happened was the popo show up, observe the situation, once it was CLEAR that no law was being broken, the popo leave. Since it's legal to open carry WI.
Now the internal memo, Linked in the OP, has a senior LEO basically telling his officers "how to get around" the law when dealing with folks legally OCing. Hence the sarcasm of the popo thinking citizens are subjects.
Enough explanation or do we need crayons?
-
You should be under observation.
-
As should you.
-
True, but for entirely different reasons.
-
Nah. Same song, different verse
-
HEY! DON'T MAKE ME TURN THIS CAR AROUND!
:P
Seriously though, I can't wait for the lawsuits to start there in Madison...
Someone should warn the chief there what "INCOMING!" means.
-
Ragnar, Battlemonkey: cool it with the personal attacks. There's plenty of vitriol to aim at the Madison PD.
-
I'm finding it hard to be too mad at Madison, when they're playing the role of the useful idiot oh so well... =D
-
I'm finding it hard to be too mad at Madison, when they're playing the role of the useful idiot oh so well... =D
Pu-leeze! Have some modicum of respect for the latest and greatest stimulus plan.
1 - Obama/Congress has been getting all sorts of flack for spreading the stimulus money to everybody but the "man in the street".
2 - There is almost no restriction placed on shoving money at law enforcement.
3 - Madison, WI PD is a law enforcement agency towards which funds can be shovelled without any meaningful oversight or scrutiny.
4 - MPD finds "man on the street" sitting on the patio of Culver's Frozen Custard, violates Constitutional rights of same knowing they are violating said rights as they had read the neighboring jurisdiction's law suit decision and the AG's Opinion.
5 - MPD gets sued by "Madison 5," loses case at summary judgement, and is ordered to pay compensation.
6 - See #3 above for source of funds for compensation payout.
7 - "Madison 5" and associated tile-crawlers have outrageous amounts of money burning holes in their pockets.
8 - "Madison 5" buy guns, ammo, new SUV to haul new toys around in (as well as friends to play with new toys).
9 - Ta! Da! Economy is stimulated, Big Government is not blamed for throwing money around wastefully, Wisconsin lawmakers are so pissed at Open Carry movement they pass concealed carry bill as emergency legislation.
10 - Profit!
And I swear I am not under the influence of hallucinogenic substances, do not have a brain tumor causing delusions, or belong to The Democrat Party.
stay safe.
-
I'm not so sure about your first assertation there, VA (about hallucinogenic substances).
That has GOT to be the most convoluted set of reasoning I have ever come across. Funny though! :cool:
-
That has GOT to be the most convoluted set of reasoning I have ever come across.
Not as convoluted as the reasons for Madison (and other cities) getting federal tax dollars.
-
Not as convoluted as the reasons for Madison (and other cities) getting federal tax dollars.
But without it, how could we ever have NICE THINGS? Like seed money to get our chance to host the Robert Mapplethorpe "Pissed Christ" on tour, or that Che Guevara statue in the town square, or get the grant money to bring Whoopi Goldberg into do "The Vagina Monologues"?
Huh? What would you rather have, a bunch of Walmarts? :mad:
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi156.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ft33%2FAJ_Dual%2F6986171.jpg&hash=3d7589b84b559e9dbc9a35c1b59b3fcc89040f7d)
-
bring Whoopi Goldberg into do "The Vagina Monologues"?
The horror...
-
I'm finding it hard to be too mad at Madison, when they're playing the role of the useful idiot oh so well... =D
Never interrupt your enemy when they are busy making a mistake....
-
There's a statue of Che in the town square?
-
There's a statue of Che in the town square?
AJ was engaging in hyperbole. There's just a statue of Castro.
-
^ Oh. Phew! I was worried there for a while.
-
AJ was engaging in hyperbole. There's just a statue of Castro.
god tell me you're joking! the fact i have to ask is bad enough