Law Student Takes Cop To School After Being Illegally Stopped For Carrying Gun

[John F Kennedy III]

Law Student Takes Cop To School After Being Illegally Stopped For Carrying Gun

Fourth Amendment rights in action

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
June 25, 2012


In a remarkable exchange that shows exactly why it pays to know your rights, a law student in Portland, Maine backed down a police officer who had stopped him for no reason other than he was carrying a gun.

After clearly stating that he did not consent to any searches or seizures, the student asked the officer what crime he had been suspected of committing.

The officer stated that he had received calls about a man carrying a gun.

“That is not illegal. Can I have my gun back and be on my way?” the student notes during the incident while filming it on his phone.

“In order to stop me you have to suspect me of a crime.” the man notes.

As Maine is a traditional open carry state, it is perfectly legal and acceptable to carry a firearm openly.

The officer, J McDonald, asks for ID, which the man declines to provide on the grounds that he has not been told he is suspected of any wrongdoing.

The student then notes that being detained without suspicion of any criminal activity violates Delaware v Prouse, and that stopping someone over a legally carried firearm violates US v DeBerry.

Seizure of the weapon with no reasonable suspicion is a violation of Terry v Ohio, and demanding ID without reasonable suspicion is a violation of Brown v Texas, the student also notes.

In a hilarious moment, a female police officer, off camera, asks the man what he has under his shirt, to which he replies “suspenders to keep my pants up”.

Eventually the officer concedes that the man is free to go and take his gun with him.

Although in this instance the stop was handled calmly by the officer, his assertion that it was “routine” highlights how the Fourth amendment to the Constitution is under constant attack every day. Thankfully some Americans are still choosing to learn and defend their rights.

Watch the exchange below:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfdEbe7e9GE&feature=player_embedded


original article here:
http://www.infowars.com/law-student-takes-cop-to-school-after-being-illegally-stopped-for-carrying-gun/

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Law Student Takes Cop To School After Being Illegally Stopped For Carrying Gun

Fourth Amendment rights in action

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
June 25, 2012


In a remarkable exchange that shows exactly why it pays to know your rights, a law student in Portland, Maine backed down a police officer who had stopped him for no reason other than he was carrying a gun.

After clearly stating that he did not consent to any searches or seizures, the student asked the officer what crime he had been suspected of committing.

The officer stated that he had received calls about a man carrying a gun.

“That is not illegal. Can I have my gun back and be on my way?” the student notes during the incident while filming it on his phone.

“In order to stop me you have to suspect me of a crime.” the man notes.

As Maine is a traditional open carry state, it is perfectly legal and acceptable to carry a firearm openly.

The officer, J McDonald, asks for ID, which the man declines to provide on the grounds that he has not been told he is suspected of any wrongdoing.

The student then notes that being detained without suspicion of any criminal activity violates Delaware v Prouse, and that stopping someone over a legally carried firearm violates US v DeBerry.

Seizure of the weapon with no reasonable suspicion is a violation of Terry v Ohio, and demanding ID without reasonable suspicion is a violation of Brown v Texas, the student also notes.

In a hilarious moment, a female police officer, off camera, asks the man what he has under his shirt, to which he replies “suspenders to keep my pants up”.

Eventually the officer concedes that the man is free to go and take his gun with him.

Although in this instance the stop was handled calmly by the officer, his assertion that it was “routine” highlights how the Fourth amendment to the Constitution is under constant attack every day. Thankfully some Americans are still choosing to learn and defend their rights.

Watch the exchange below:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfdEbe7e9GE&feature=player_embedded


original article here:
http://www.infowars.com/law-student-takes-cop-to-school-after-being-illegally-stopped-for-carrying-gun/

Our Founding Fathers didn't divorce us from tyranny by citing legal precedence; but, they divorced us by overturning every prior legal precedent by establishing a natural law. Natural law was the metaphysical scientific method in use during that time.

[John F Kennedy III]

bump

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

You shouldn't post any videos in here unless you can include with them your own intelligent commentary. Understand, I'm not saying you should be disallowed. I'm saying we should go by our conscience. Posting endless videos about corruption is a downhill process just like the corruption itself.
If we could, we would all rather ski down the slope and then take a lift back up. Oh, this might seem like work, but it is all downhill. Or, like baby dolphins, we'd much prefer to remain towards the surface of the ocean. This is why mother dolphins force their babies into the deep waters to exercize holding their breaths.
And one doesn't have to look very hard to find the crap-of-the-day to post. If you want to reach the designation of a founder, with this person being a new kind of leader other than a lawyer, you're going to have to do some mountain climbing.

[Simple]

Thanks for posting that video. Keep them coming =P

[TheGrinch]

But is it legal for all citizens, including those who've committed felonies to open-carry? If not, then I think the cop was well within the law to actually have probable cause, considering it was responding to complaints, not just his decision. If that's the case, then he was acutally being a ncie guy (or intimidated by the lawyer) to not press him about it.

Now, I'm not here to debate the way things should be, but under the current system, I wouldn't have blamed the cop at all for arresting him for refusing to provide ID or a permit to verify he could carry a firearm in public, after he'd recieved concerns from citizens, which yes, I think is good enough for reasonable suspicion, which is usually what's required (not probable cause) for a traffic stop). Though again, all of this is assuming that there are restrictions/permits to open-carry...

[dbill27]

You shouldn't post any videos in here unless you can include with them your own intelligent commentary. Understand, I'm not saying you should be disallowed. I'm saying we should go by our conscience. Posting endless videos about corruption is a downhill process just like the corruption itself.
If we could, we would all rather ski down the slope and then take a lift back up. Oh, this might seem like work, but it is all downhill. Or, like baby dolphins, we'd much prefer to remain towards the surface of the ocean. This is why mother dolphins force their babies into the deep waters to exercize holding their breaths.
And one doesn't have to look very hard to find the crap-of-the-day to post. If you want to reach the designation of a founder, with this person being a new kind of leader other than a lawyer, you're going to have to do some mountain climbing.

So that's why mother dolphins do that, thanks

[Anti Federalist]

But is it legal for all citizens, including those who've committed felonies to open-carry? If not, then I think the cop was well within the law to actually have probable cause, considering it was responding to complaints, not just his decision. If that's the case, then he was acutally being a ncie guy (or intimidated by the lawyer) to not press him about it.

Now, I'm not here to debate the way things should be, but under the current system, I wouldn't have blamed the cop at all for arresting him for refusing to provide ID or a permit to verify he could carry a firearm in public, after he'd recieved concerns from citizens, which yes, I think is good enough for reasonable suspicion, which is usually what's required (not probable cause) for a traffic stop). Though again, all of this is assuming that there are restrictions/permits to open-carry...

There is no such thing as a "permit" to carry openly in Maine.

[TheGrinch]

There is no such thing as a "permit" to carry openly in Maine.
Thanks for the clarification. Then I agree. There's pretty much no open carry laws in rural South GA either, even though the state requires a permit, so Is be chapped to be harassed there just the same

[Matt Collins]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXwP02Dkp7A

[jmdrake]

Great video! +rep. Keep it up.

[kathy88]

So that's why mother dolphins do that, thanksHahaha possible best post ever!!!

[Tod]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXwP02Dkp7A

Good find, Matt! +rep