Update on the Philly OC case - radio interview with the chief

Status
Not open for further replies.
Glenn Dee and JGCoastie,

I see neither of you have addressed hogdogs' point about conservation officers / game wardens, but it was a good point. They are dealing with guys who they KNOW are carrying guns, typically rifles, shotguns, or big-bore handguns. In many cases, those folks will have a long gun in hand.

I don't often hear of conservation officers or game wardens making an approach with a drawn weapon aimed at a hunter's COM.

If you want to use the "license" issue, these officers could do a very similar check, for a hunting license vs a carry license. Either way, hunting in the woods or carrying in Philadelphia, the person has to have a license.

So why do Philadelphia cops approach with drawn guns, when game wardens typically do not?

(Oh, by the way, when last I lived in Florida, conservation and game warden types had higher per capita shooting incidents than the regular LE agencies, primarily due to stumbling across marijuana crops. In fact, I suspect many such officers in many states have more dangerous dealings than do most Philadelphia police.)

JGCoastie, a drawn weapon, held at low ready, might arguably be called "officer presence." That same weapon, aimed center mass, without any cause would arguably be called "assault."
 
Mleake; the one difference between DNR and the local Police is this: the DNR expect to encounter hunters, during hunting season the armed men they encounter are typically not dangerous unless you are a whitetail; When the local Police encounter armed men they typically are a threat to them and us(I am not saying all OCers are dangerous to the cops) In Philly if you are wearing a weapon, openly considering the law, if I were a cop, I would probably figure a thug is gonna hide his piece. So I would probably not have drawn down on the dude, but I AIN"T NO COP so what do I know to tell a Philly COP what to do?
 
Mleake; the one difference between DNR and the local Police is this: the DNR expect to encounter hunters, during hunting season the armed men they encounter are typically not dangerous unless you are a whitetail;
Click to expand...
Actually you are wrong! Typically the percentage of "hunters" in the woods without a license or planning to commit a wildlife violation are far from ZERO%... and then they have the VERY REAL risk that the hunter they are about to make contact with is a convicted felon who knows he lost his gun rights! And yet I just found a tree trunk to lean my gun on after I cleared the chamber so I could pull out my license for the officer!!!

In FLA these same officers are the "fish cops" and they are tasked with keeping drunk boaters off the water.... They can expect 100% of the boats to have a gun aboard and a DRUNK operator and occupants. Never been drawn on before a "courtesy (never understood that term) stop" to check my ability or my catch commenced.

When the local Police encounter armed men they typically are a threat to them and us(I am not saying all OCers are dangerous to the cops)
Click to expand...
What sort of miniscule percentage of citizens that these cops have contacted in the past to base this on have been openly armed with a HOLSTERED EXPOSED firearm? And what smaller percentage of the miniscule percent turned out to be up to nefarious behavior? That one just won't hold water with this fella!

In Philly if you are wearing a weapon, openly considering the law, if I were a cop, I would probably figure a thug is gonna hide his piece. So I would probably not have drawn down on the dude, but I AIN"T NO COP so what do I know to tell a Philly COP what to do?
Click to expand...

And you, sir, just made the point for all of us against the way this was handled!!!
Brent
 
Mleake; the one difference between DNR and the local Police is this: the DNR expect to encounter hunters, during hunting season the armed men they encounter are typically not dangerous
Click to expand...

It is not the lawfully open carrying civilian's fault that the LEO has been improperly trained and is misusing his authority. LEOs in PA have been told this is legal and have chosen to ignore the law in this case.
 
And to be quite honest, when I'm wearing my LEO hat, if I see a weapon, or have reasonable suspicion of a person's immediate access to a weapon, my gun will be drawn.

Period.

I have a wife and two young children to go home to; and I will do everything within my power to do exactly that.
Click to expand...

I know you don't have any reasonable suspicion/probable cause under any circumstances because I do not break any laws. So when you stop me, I know in advance it is a prima facie illegal detention.

So consider this from your point of view. If I see you begin to draw level one, I'm drawing level six in the "force continuum" and you are going down. I'm betting you cannot beat me to the trigger pull if you are drawing not to fire.

Of course, as a lawful handgun carrier, I only draw to fire, which never happens until you come along with your frontier tinhorn lawman mentality.

You see, I have a wife and four children to go home to, and I don't suffer fools well. I may do time, but I will win on appeal if convicted, and I will eventually get home.

I hate to ratchet up the rhetoric here folks, being a newcomer and all, but this guy deserved a reality check.

Frankly, that Philly cop who assaulted Firorino is lucky he isn't six feet in the ground right now. “Get on your knees” and “I’m going to shoot you” while held at gunpoint? Clearly self defense was warranted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jgcoastie: A police officer who started an unlawful gunfight with me would be making a mistake. And if they pull a gun on me without lawful cause, that's exactly what they'd have done. My best bet isn't to go for my weapon, it's to jump or dive behind cover, THEN draw, then engage from behind cover.

It gets worse. At that point, they don't just have to worry about me. It just became legal for anybody else to put a bullet in the back of their head as a "defense of others" case.

Starting gunfights with random strangers is not conducive to going home in one piece every night.
 
jgcoastie: A police officer who started an unlawful gunfight with me would be making a mistake. And if they pull a gun on me without lawful cause, that's exactly what they'd have done. My best bet isn't to go for my weapon, it's to jump or dive behind cover, THEN draw, then engage from behind cover.
Click to expand...

This thread should be closed on that low note:barf:

WildthankgodwehavelawsinplaceAlaska ™©2002-2011
 
c'mon folks... Watch the rhetoric... This will get closed for posts that are seemingly inviting violence etc.... I would like it to stay open for good discussion!

Last one got closed for cop bashin' I was surprised this one wasn't just called an extension of that one and immediately closed.

If we keep it civil "them brown shirt, jack booted thug" moderators :D won't have to pull out their .45cal lock button on us like that philly copper did to the legal oc guy.

Brent
 
Gentlemen,

Let's control ourselves. Less bravado and more informative. This topic is worth discussion. Avoid getting it shutdown.
 
bigbaby, whether an armed person in Philadelphia would make you or an officer nervous is beside the point: the fact remains that it is not prima facie illegal behavior.

Sgt Daugherty is solely responsible for creating the initial conflict, due to his over-the-top metho of checking ID. His Chief's words, after the fact, make it seem even more likely than I had initially thought that the problem, and attitude, is institutional in Philly.

I never OC, but next time I am in Philly I just might...
 
Why is the cop not being prosecuted for official oppression and simple assault?

§ 5301. Official oppression.

A person acting or purporting to act in an official capacity or taking advantage of such actual or purported capacity commits a misdemeanor of the second degree if, knowing that his conduct is illegal, he:

(1) subjects another to arrest, detention, search,seizure, mistreatment, dispossession, assessment, lien orother infringement of personal or property rights; or

(2) denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity.​
Click to expand...


If the charges weren't filed until after the audio was released it doesn't look but I am sure the DA has unlimited discretion.
 
Closing the thread was not mentioned when the cop said he was going home at all costs to others. Now that some have expressed their views with guns pointed in the other direction, it's close to closing time.

This is a topic that needs to be aired in light of what happened in Philidelphia and in view of the many incidents in recent memory in which police behavior is questionable. Locking a relevant and timely topic is not what an internet message board should be about. JMHO.
 
I understand what you are saying. But what we say and how we say it give weight to the value of our argument. The event that is the focus of this discussion demands attention. Let us maintain a fair amount of dignity in our responses.

With that I shall remain a reader.
 
Dougherty Was Clearly In The Wrong

First of all, his overriding concern for self-safety would have been better served by observing Mr. Fiorino from a safe distance while calling for backup. Instead, his fear fueled his attitude as can clearly heard on the recording as he accosted the young man. Also, if Fiorino was headed off to commit a criminal act, Dougherty might have remained low-key and been in prime location to stop the crime in process. Instead, he leaped into action, gun drawn and swearing like a sailor. Had Fiorino's situational awareness been keen enough to detect the Sgt's approach, gun drawn, a gunfight might have ensued right there on the street. All things considered, Dougherty's actions on just this basis alone were dangerous and irrational.

Second, Dougherty's ignorance of the law provoked the entire situation and dramatically colored his approach and treatment of Fiorino. Sorry folks, but police are no more insulated from ignorance of the law than are civilians. Now i myself am not a believer in open carry, and this illustrates one of the reasons, but legal behavior is legal behavior. I expect this police chief is creating a precedent for Philadelphia that he will learn to regret when the civil rights lawsuits get decided.

It's a good thing no one was shot. It seems rather clear that the DA filing charges against Fiorino is in retaliation for posting the recording on the web. But if allowing the public to hear how a veteran police officer mishandled an arrest is a crime, why isn't he charged with that? Charging him with obstruction or whatever is just silly.
 
s.a.m., You are correct! This forum does not claim equality. The discussion of drawing on and firing on an officer as an acceptable thing just won't fly...

I am no mod but see their point... Not to mention the owner of the forum also owns SWAT magazine...

I consider us lucky to have this forum where legal citizens and officers can see who can, intellectually, pee higher up the wall...

Most forums with an affinity to LEO's is off limits to the non badge toting citizen... those forums that do allow citizens to post sort of require that only "cop lovers" are allowed!

this forum is a unique situation and I, personally, do not mind the rules in place!

I, as the mods, will tell anyone... "If you don't like the rules of etiquette or protocol of this forum.... don't let the door hitcha where the good lord splitcha...":D

But this is only my opinion and if I am wrong... the mods will tongue (finger in this case) lash me but good...

Brent
 
S.A.M., Also, there is a difference in sayin'... "If a gun is pointed at me, Ima gonna blow his fool head off..." and "I do not take kindly to having guns pointed at me and I will take the measures necessary to nip it in the bud..."


It is what is often referred to as "chest thumping" and "bravado".... And YES!!! I am far from perfect and been called to the carpet for some posts I have made. Live and learn I reckon...

brent
 
The police officer had no probable cause, the whole incident should not have happened... Further and every judge in the world seems to hold this true "ignorance of the law is no defense for violating the law".

The police office has a duty to know the laws he or she is required to enforce and to know what is permissible... The officer was ignorant of the law and this is the result, the officer was wrong and this legal gun owner was not.

In this case it seems like the cop was in full on contempt of cop mode with little if any reason to be in this state.

The officer as I understand in some way reprimanded as he should be... IMHO though the DA who filed the charges should be disbarred from being an attorney due to the malicious prosecution of what was not a crime. To me the officers offense was less than the prosecutor because he made a mistake in not being aware of the law, the DA is aware but choosing to ignore how law is suppose to work and is intentionally overstepping and abusing his powers of his office....

I cant wait to see how many millions of dollars the city has to pay out in order to learn to respect civil rights....
 
Last edited:
What would have happened if another citizen drew and aimed their weapon as this officer did? Simple, they would be charged with assault, probably felony assault. That is what should happen in this case, IMO. There must be some gun rights organization willing to make a big enough stink to make it happen.

And yes, jgcoastie, that includes exactly how you described you would act. Drawing and pointing a gun at someone who is breaking no laws and doing nothing to suggest they are an immediate thread is assault.
 
I am sorely tempted to close this, right here and now. Such a closing would be accompanied by banning the folks who have decided that chest thumping and unlawful behavior is warranted.

So that I don't have to go that route, everyone participating in this thread is on notice.

The next person to advocate unlawful behavior, by anyone (law enforcement or civilian) will get the boot and the thread will close. That will mean this topic will be permanently off the roster, as it will be the second thread on the same subject that was closed.

This is the only warning anyone gets. Fail to read and abide by this at your own peril.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top