A brush with the law.

I

iblong

New member
Well my gal had her first brush with the police today,
She had a doctors appt.today and was running late (go figure) any way she forgot to leave her hand gun in the car,
one of the nurses saw it and called 911.Her doctor walks into the exam room and starts chuckling and she asks whats so funny,he say's I have to warn you there 4 cops out side waiting to see you,one of the nurses saw your hand gun and called it in.He then says dont worry about it,I grew up with guns and have a permit also,and respect the right of others to carry.Ill walk you out after were done.
Well the officers were very pofessional,and polite.Asked why she carries a gun,She replys she is disabled and wants to protect her self.They ran the checks,told her happy birthday and sent her on her way.
 
Actually, it's none of their business or anyone else's why she carries!

Sounds like they handled it OK, but the most they should have done is ask for her permit and then sent her on her way!

Glad it turned out OK!
Tim
 
Many LEO's think asking questions is part of the job for some reason. Some are collage educated, and haven't lost that bias yet towards citizens with firearms.
Or maybe they were just curiouse about why she carried?
The fact that it was handled like it was, considering the surroundings (Dr office drugs ect.) is a big plus. Sopunds like you have a good dept there and some good police. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
 
So did the nurse see the gun because she was undressing or did her clothes fail to conceal it in a normal situation?
I don't know the details or much at all really, but you may want to look at better concealment options, if some thug can easily spot it, that won't be her gun for long.
They call it Concealed Carry for a reason.
 
As far as the how or why it was spotted is a polite conversation we'll be having after work tonight,she is a women and baggie cloths is not her norm.
And the dept.Is for the most part pro carry and they are petty good to deal with for the most part,the sherrif dept.opens there gun range to the public 2 weekend a month in the winter and carry classes are held there as well.
The even offer some defencive shooting classes,and leauges.
Theres worse counties you could live in.
Bob.
 
Quote:
Actually, it's none of their business or anyone else's why she carries!

Sounds like they handled it OK, but the most they should have done is ask for her permit and then sent her on her way!

Glad it turned out OK!
Tim



Cops ask questions, that's why they are COP's it's part of the job. I would have asked that question also. I want to know if her estranged husband or boyfriend is stalking her so I don't walk into some whack job as I'm leaving the office. It all has to do with Officer safety, something the non LEO person has never had to deal with. I would have believed them to be doing a crappy job if they had not asked her all the questions.

Just because it's legal for someone to carry a concealed pistol doesn't mean that the person being interviewed is authorized to carry. CCP permits get revoked for a number of reasons and often times the person in question may not even know the permit has been revoked.

So actually it IS their business /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smiliesmack.gif
 
I agree with Falfire, also if anyone was around it is a good "dog and pony show" to reassure them that the Cop, is doing his job and asking a few questions, not "just letting her go" as in I can hear the story now " I was at the Doctor today and some woman was carrying a gun!! and the Police just let her go!!! something has to be done!!" A 'Police Presence' reassures some folks.
Carl
 
Quote:
Quote:
Actually, it's none of their business or anyone else's why she carries!

Sounds like they handled it OK, but the most they should have done is ask for her permit and then sent her on her way!

Glad it turned out OK!
Tim



Cops ask questions, that's why they are COP's it's part of the job. I would have asked that question also. I want to know if her estranged husband or boyfriend is stalking her so I don't walk into some whack job as I'm leaving the office. It all has to do with Officer safety, something the non LEO person has never had to deal with. I would have believed them to be doing a crappy job if they had not asked her all the questions.

Just because it's legal for someone to carry a concealed pistol doesn't mean that the person being interviewed is authorized to carry. CCP permits get revoked for a number of reasons and often times the person in question may not even know the permit has been revoked.

So actually it IS their business /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smiliesmack.gif



I guess what I meant was not what I said! Since I have my CCP for Kansas, it is my own business behind why I carry, basically because I can.

I have not been in a situation where I have been checked, but if I am ever checked, past the point where they determine that I am carrying legally, it is none of their business why I am doing it, and I would explain that as politely as I could.

Tim
 
Sounds like everything turned out okay. Good to hear. General rule of thumb. Cops ask questions, and its good to remember that you are under no obligation to answer them, EVER, I repeat EVER. The fifth ammendment ALWAYS applies, because a cop is trained to get you to incriminate yourself. My answer probably would have been (in a polite tone) because I can.

Mark
 
Quote:
Sounds like everything turned out okay. Good to hear. General rule of thumb. Cops ask questions, and its good to remember that you are under no obligation to answer them, EVER, I repeat EVER. The fifth ammendment ALWAYS applies, because a cop is trained to get you to incriminate yourself. My answer probably would have been (in a polite tone) because I can.

Mark



First, you may need to rethink that line of thought because you could be taking an unscheduled trip "downtown" if you refuse to answer some questions. Second, if you aren't committing a crime, how is an officer going to incriminate you in any crime? For the life of me I don't understand this mindset. And you wonder why sometimes there is an attitude of "us vs. them." That is the type of mindset that fosters that situation. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smiliesmack.gif
 
GC, Remember back, how many times when we would book Mr. " I know my rights" John Doe into jail. Then when the jail staff finally got around to talking to them, about 10 hours later, they learned the only thing wrong was that Mr. Doe only had and expired drivers license but refused to talk to the cops or show proper ID when asked. Can't tell ya how often that happens but it sure is a self correcting problem for most folks. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

There are certain questions that do require an answer, no matter who you THINK are.
 
Quote:
Sounds like everything turned out okay. Good to hear. General rule of thumb. Cops ask questions, and its good to remember that you are under no obligation to answer them, EVER, I repeat EVER. The fifth ammendment ALWAYS applies, because a cop is trained to get you to incriminate yourself. My answer probably would have been (in a polite tone) because I can.

Mark



I agree with you Mark .
 
Man, Cops have a job that I for one couldn't do...atleast not with out going to jail myself, and they do it for D@#K pay. So what if he asks a question or two, if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about. Answer the dang questions and when he is done with you,thank him for the job he does and carry on. This theory and idea that cops are out to put innocent law abiding people in jail or even hassle, [beeep] me off.

Chupa
 
Answering questions is no problem until they read you your rights. Then you better shut up and wait for your attorney to answer the questions.
if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about. Answer the dang question.
Sorry, more innocent people have been convicted because of that than anything else.

Jack
 
Worked in Homeland Security for a while, met a lot of different folks, some former cops, some from other cooperating agencies. Some are great, most are ok, and some just flat out suck.

Then a couple of weeks ago, I was driving down a street in a crap part of town. Saw a couple of police cars, no lights on, everybody just standing around talking. Got within 40 yards of the cars and a cop steps out with a Glock and points it at me. I stop and throw up my hands. He motions for me to leave, so I left.

After some 911 calls, trying to figure out what was going on, I got a call from a sergeant saying the officer thought I was going too fast.

Since when is 20 mph a shootable offense?

I'm getting where I don't trust anybody.
 
All went well gentalmen no harm no foul.
She was alittle freaked out by 4 officers,Once permit was in hand the tenceness of the situation calmed a bit,and they were polite enough given there was a gun involved.
She felt 4 was a little much to send for a 5'3'120lb women,I explained 1)they did not know you had a permit and you might have been some kind of nut for all they know .
2)your pretty much as much threat as 300lb man if you have a gun in your hand,and they all want to go home at the end of the day.besides now shes got that experiance out of the way and wont be quite so freaked out if it happens again.
Bob.
 
I'm of the opinion that I will NEVER talk to a Fed without a lawyer. The Federal Government passed a law that provides for 5 years of free room a board with some of the worst sx you will ever have if you lie to a fed officer. What if a fed asks a question and you happen to be wrong in your answer, its vacation time. They want me to talk, change the law.

As far as local police and routine questions like iblong's lady was asked, I would have no problems in that situation. However, if I was ever involved in a shooting while protecting myself or family, I wouldn't say a word without my lawyer present. The cops do the same thing when they get into a shooting. I read a good article a few years ago in Dillon's Blue Press that basically said that this is the only way to protect your rights in such situations. The Blue Press said by talking you will be only providing the police with information that they will use against you.

Maybe you are able to avoid going to jail, but anything you say will become part of the public record and can be used against you during the upcoming civil case that the family brings against you. This alone is reason enough to not talk.
 
Some of you are going from 10 mph to 100 mph in this discussion, they aren't the same thing. A casual interview by an officer shouldn't involve the same amount of cautiousness by an innocent person as a full blown investigation when a shooting or something like that has taken place. That is an apple to oranges comparison fella's.
 
Back
Top