LEO's what is safe etiquette when stopped

[Old Bill Dibble]

The standard for non sworn civilians and for the police to use deadly force is being put in fear for one's life or the life of another. The operative word being fear.

If a police officer draw's his pistol and threatens the use of deadly force, and that officer intends to remain within the law... he must be feeling fear. Or has he placed himself above the law?

You left out "or serious injury". Also in most states officers may also use deadly force against escaping prisoners although a lot of police agencies don't allow that these days as a matter of local policy.

Also certain law enforcement agencies such as those at Nuclear Power Plants and other high risk facilities are under a looser set of rules to protect the facility or certain items from falling into the wrong hands and causing a catastrophe.

The Garner ruling changed quite a lot. Under common law a lot of felonies were punishable by life in prison or death. That is no longer the case. That is one of several reasons why the police were placed under near the same restrictions as everyone else. I think this is a good thing.

I should also point out that most officers won't verbally threaten the use of deadly force unless the suspect is being provocative. Having the gun out is an indicator but often just precautionary.

 

[JERRYS.]

millions of officer citizen contacts each day; millions each day.

you have a far greater chance of dying at the hands of your spouse, doctor, dentist, or neighbor than you do from the cops.

 

[Kimio]

In all of my 4-5 encounters with LEO's I've never had a bad experience when being pulled over.

The single time I was pulled over while carrying was because I had a broken tail light lens that I had yet to fix (happened no more that 40 minutes prior to being pulled over that night).

The officer was very professional and I greeted him as I would any other normal human being and did the following.

- Turned on the cabin light of my car
- waited patiently, ensuring that I did not move until he was at my window with my hands in plain sight
- Immediately informed him that I was armed, and had a permit that legally allowed me to carry concealed
- When I was asked for my license, vehicle registration and my CWP, I first ask permission to reach into my pocket (since the handgun was located on the side I carried my wallet) if not, would he like me to step out of the car so that I may disarm for his safety (He kindly said that was not necessary)

I waited roughly 20 minutes as he ran my license and he came back to request that I get some tape to cover up the broken lens as soon as possible to avoid blinding other drivers at night.

He thanked me and went about his business as did I. Yes, there are bad apples out there, but I've found that 9/10 times, if you're calm and courteous you'll generally be let off with little to no hassle.

If you don't agree with something, you can then file a complaint with your local PD chief or what have you. I've been lucky to have never found the need to do that.

In short, be clear about your intentions, provide as much information as you're comfortable with revealing and just try not to be a jerk. Most LEO's are just doing their jobs and trying to get through the day so that they can get home with that pay check to provide for their loved ones just like most us are trying to do.

 

[evidrine]

I have had good experiences and bad. I always try to be polite not because they are police officers but because it is a good practice and the right thing to do. I was raised to polite with anyone. I know lots of people In law enforcement. I am not very close to any of them so I do not consider myself biased either way. I have been given tickets, warnings, and have been lied to by more than one officer. I do know that nothing good will come from a bad attitude that can escalate any situation. Let him do what he thinks he has to do and you do what you need to do to get things resolved professionally. Take it up in court if you have to. Signing a ticket is not admitting guilt. In most cases the issuing officer will not bother showing up in court anyway.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

 

[849ACSO]

The standard for non sworn civillians and for the police to use deadly force is being put in fear for one's life or the life of another. The operative word being fear.

Huh??

I've been a full time LEO for 22 years. I've never read the word "fear" in the law.............

Here is an excerpt from Tennessee v. Garner -

----"the officer reasonably believes that the action is in defense of human life . . . or in defense of any person in immediate danger of serious physical injury"

Here is the excerpt from the Revised Statutes of Missouri -

----"He or she reasonably believes that such deadly force is necessary to protect himself, or herself or her unborn child, or another against death, serious physical injury, or any forcible felony"

This is from the Illinois Compiled Statutes -

----"However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony."

This is from Kansas-

"A person is justified in the use of deadly force under circumstances described in subsection (a) if such person reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to such person or a third person."

I could go on and on, but where do you come up with fear?

I've been involved in a shooting. I don't ever recall being afraid. I recall watching a gun being leveled at another officer and thinking "now I HAVE to do something".

You act as though the police are running around jumping off the ground, wide eyed at every bump in the night. I'm more apprehensive of the public's crumby attitude now more than ever, but afraid, not so much.

As far as this:

Also in most states officers may also use deadly force against escaping prisoners although a lot of police agencies don't allow that these days as a matter of local policy.

it's not local policy. It's Tennessee v. Garner, a SCOTUS decision, not a local policy. And it's been around since 1985................

Having the gun out is an indicator but often just precautionary.

The display of a weapon IS NOT considered deadly force.

 

[A J]

A couple months ago I got stopped by a young game warden for no really good reason except walking in the woods. I didn't have ID on me and the guy started to freak out. I knew it was a BS stop but kept my cool, calmly chatting with him until his "back up" arrived. The "back up" cop was a local deputy. He just laughed and sent me on the way.

Moral of the story: Be nice to LEOs, even if they're not 100% right.

 

[Old Bill Dibble]

it's not local policy. It's Tennessee v. Garner, a SCOTUS decision, not a local policy. And it's been around since 1985................

Nope. There are other exceptions based on Federal and State Laws and policies for escaping prisoners. Prisoners that are committed to secure penal and jail facilities or being transported between them.

 

[849ACSO]

Nope. There are other exceptions based on Federal and State Laws and policies for escaping prisoners. Prisoners that are committed to secure penal and jail facilities or being transported between them.

probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force.

It follows Garner directly and applies to all jails and prisons, regardless of what the state law says. The SCOTUS trumps whatever the state law says, period.

My state still has laws on the books that allow the shooting of fleeing felons and jail/prison escapees, but they are invalid, and have been since 1985.

Try shooting someone who is escaping from prison for felony bad check writing and see where you end up.......... you will likely take his place in prison. There are no exceptions to a SCOTUS ruling that aren't already in the ruling.

 

[Old Bill Dibble]

I don't have to try it.

You will have to take it up with the USAG:

https://www.justice.gov/ag/attorney-general-october-17-1995-memorandum-resolution-14-attachment

B. Escaping prisoners.

1. Unless force other than deadly force appears to be sufficient, deadly force may be used to prevent the escape of a prisoner committed to the custody of the Attorney General or the Bureau of Prisons

a. if the prisoner is escaping from a secure institution or is escaping while in transit to or from a secure institution; or

Or this guy:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/new-yo...had-right-to-shoot-unarmed-fugitive-1.3131601

Note there was no immediate threat of danger or harm to anyone.

or this guy:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/07/us/arkansas-inmate-shot-dead/

Graves said the guards followed a policy that authorizes the use of deadly force to keep a prisoner from trying to escape a fenced institution.

And lots of other cases.

 

[Old Bill Dibble]

I guess I should also point out the Garner was a civil case not a criminal one. The criminal standard is still up to the states which is why the laws are still on the books in your state and mine. Officers can still get their pants sued off and go to jail for US civil rights violations but can only be charged with murder and assault if their state laws allow it.

This is why a lot of agencies have made local policy more restrictive.

 

[shafter]

It seems that today that much of the public has an agenda and that many of the police harbor a deep fear of the people they serve.

We aren't afraid of the people we serve (responsible, law-abiding, tax paying citizens), we're afraid of the people we protect those we serve from. Unfortunately we have no way of knowing who's who so we have to act with caution around everyone. The same way you would be cautious around a strange dog. Most mean no harm but some will bite ya.

It has absolutely nothing to do with law enforcement wanting to restrict your rights. That fight lies elsewhere. Protest and debate with our elected officials and in the courtroom, not with the officer on the side of the road.

 

[JERRYS.]

shafer is correct.

I will add, when the sheep and the wolf look the same how do the cops know which is which? by their actions, but that is not know until contact is made.

 

[849ACSO]

I guess I should also point out the Garner was a civil case not a criminal one. The criminal standard is still up to the states which is why the laws are still on the books in your state and mine

Until SCOTUS says it's unconstitutional, which they did in Garner. Garner, a non-violent felon, was "seized with a bullet" while fleeing/escaping. SCOTUS says that's unconstitutional, and any law/policy to the contrary, is therefore the same.

Maybe one of the lawyers in the forum will come along and sprinkle some legal expert goodness on this banana split.......................

 

[Old Bill Dibble]

If a lawyer's opinion were markedly different than mine or the USAG I will be surprised.

We aren't afraid of the people we serve (responsible, law-abiding, tax paying citizens), we're afraid of the people we protect those we serve from.

See I disagree here, police serve irresponsible, law breaking, non-tax paying citizens as well. In fact much more often.

Irresponsible people often end up in contact with police either by misadventure, carelessness or foolishness.

Criminals are often the victim of violent crime, much more often than those who do not break laws. They are the first to call the police when their stuff gets stolen. They get served in other ways too...

At least 40% of the country pay little or no income taxes, the bottom 12% percent are essentially wards of the state as disabled, complete welfare cases, prisoners and other such circumstances.

 

[armedleo]

How about we just put the shoe on a different foot for a moment?

When you're pulled over you don't know a lot of things about the cop stopping you, do you? Is he mean, a scared rookie, nice, a respecter of rights, an evidence planter, a cop with an "itchy finger"? It takes all kinds that come to police work. Most good and well-intentioned. Some are attracted to this kind of work for more nefarious reasons.

I would refer you to JohnKSa's earlier post and have it tattooed in your memory bank.

 

[849ACSO]

See I disagree here, police serve irresponsible, law breaking, non-tax paying citizens as well. In fact much more often.

Irresponsible people often end up in contact with police either by misadventure, carelessness or foolishness.

Criminals are often the victim of violent crime, much more often than those who do not break laws. They are the first to call the police when their stuff gets stolen. They get served in other ways too...

At least 40% of the country pay little or no income taxes, the bottom 12% percent are essentially wards of the state as disabled, complete welfare cases, prisoners and other such circumstances.

We are definitely on the same page here............

 

[K_Mac]

See I disagree here, police serve irresponsible, law breaking, non-tax paying citizens as well. In fact much more often.

Irresponsible people often end up in contact with police either by misadventure, carelessness or foolishness.

Criminals are often the victim of violent crime, much more often than those who do not break laws. They are the first to call the police when their stuff gets stolen. They get served in other ways too...

At least 40% of the country pay little or no income taxes, the bottom 12% percent are essentially wards of the state as disabled, complete welfare cases, prisoners and other such circumstances.

I am a supporter of police and have a couple of good friends who are longtime officers. It is easy for them to see everyone they deal with as part of the problem if they lose focus on the importance the service they provide. When police see those they serve as criminals and deadbeats deserving of what they get it is reflected the way they do their job. It is reflected in the way they interact with people. It also impacts the way they are viewed by the communities they serve.

Where I live it is unlikely that I will have any issues during a routine stop. That is not true everywhere though. There are many reasons for this that can't be addressed here. Police and those they serve need to be treated with respect. That is far easier said than done.

 

[Dusty Rivers]

Pulled over while carrying

Got pulled over by a Texas DPS Trooper. New Car bought at 10 PM late dealer purchase. Took till 10 PM to get the paperwork done. Dealer didn't have a tag.

Trooper observed no tag and lite me up. I pulled over, put the window down and put both hands on top of the steering wheel right in his lights. He walks up and explains why he pulled me over. First thing out of my mouth is I have a concealed carry ( actually a carry permit now) permit and I am carrying. He says ok, where is it? I say on my hip. He says ok. Then I explain why I have no temp tag. He says the salesman told you wrong that it was ok to drive home. Then he says let me see your driver's license. I do not move. He says - no wait where is your gun? I say on my right hip. He says where is your driver's license. I say on my left hip. He says ok I trust you let me see your license. He then proceeds to shine his flashlight on my left hand as I dig my wallet out of my left back pocket. He then says let me see the sales paperwork. I say it is in the trunk. He says ok get out and get them. We proceed to the trunk. I open it and pull out a folder from a bag full of stuff I emptied out of my trade in. He looks at the paperwork, walks around to the front and checks the vin number against the paperwork. He then says get back in. He goes back to his car and runs my license, comes back up and gives me a written warning for which I sign. My wife and I thank him and we are on our way home.

Super great interaction. He never asked to see my gun or my permit. He didn't go through my bag of junk in the trunk. He was extremely respectful and so were we. I tried to make him as safe as possible and he apparently returned the favor. Hats off th the Texas DPS Troopers. They are first rate. Thanks trooper! Glad I gave this subject a lot of thought prior.

 

[TXAZ]

As a very senior DPS'er once said about what people should do when pulled over, he quipped
"Don't do anything stupid. If you don't know what constitutes stupid, you shouldn't be driving."

If you were really impressed with the trooper, consider dropping an email or letter to DPS Director Steve McCraw, those guys seldom get any positive strokes.

 

[2ndsojourn]

"He goes back to his car and runs my license, .....

He never asked to see my gun or my permit."
That's probably because when he ran your driver's license the info about your carry permit was linked.