If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Cleveland Plain Dealer)   Cleveland police refuse to return gun to man who consented to a legal search. Naturally, the gun owner is suing for the return of his weapon--and tens of thousands of dollars in damages   (cleveland.com) divider line 147
    More: Asinine, Cleveland Police, Photo of the Day, refuses  
•       •       •

10163 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Aug 2013 at 5:02 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



147 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-08-10 01:04:58 PM
I'm not a fan of gun owners but this is theft by the police.
 
2013-08-10 01:09:03 PM
How is this different than cash seizures? I am not saying either is good.
 
2013-08-10 01:10:36 PM
Why should he have to buy a new one? His old one was stolen and he knows exactly who has it.
 
2013-08-10 01:17:34 PM

Arthur Jumbles: I'm not a fan of gun owners but this is theft by the police.


violentsalvation: Why should he have to buy a new one? His old one was stolen and he knows exactly who has it.


/2 lazy 2 typ
 
2013-08-10 01:17:57 PM
The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-10 01:20:21 PM

Arthur Jumbles: I'm not a fan of gun owners but this is theft by the police.


If it's true and there isn't anything being left out.
 
2013-08-10 01:39:34 PM
Nobody has explained to me why poor people are allowed to carry guns in the first place.  I hope the political right grows some balls and gets their arms in the air over this.  I can't bear to live in a world where people making under 250,000 dollars are allowed to carry guns.  As always, the history of man has been the history of poor people oppressing the rich.
 
2013-08-10 01:54:50 PM

Arthur Jumbles: I'm not a fan of gun owners



Why so mad, bro?
 
2013-08-10 02:12:43 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


"He spoke with officers and later told them that he had a permit to carry a concealed weapon, which was in his car, according to the suit.

He bought the .38-caliber Taurus on Feb. 19, 2011, for about $500 from Atlantic Gun and Tackle, the suit said, and he has a receipt for it.

The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

But he was never charged, and his attorney, J. Gary Seewald, says Washington does not have a criminal record
."

Well it's one or the other. And if he is a felon he goes into "how about we enforce existing gun laws and charge the motherfarker? FFS" category. And if he's not a felon the cops need to give him his goddamn gun back.
 
2013-08-10 03:49:02 PM

clancifer: How is this different than cash seizures? I am not saying either is good.


It's not. Legal is legal, illegal is illegal, private property remains that, and due process is always required. They need to shiat or get off the pot.

I hope he wins that plus more.
 
2013-08-10 04:47:55 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


Well, except in this case it kind of is. He has a permit, a receipt and, apparently, no felony record.

That is to say, it never should have been seized in the first place and should now be returned.
 
2013-08-10 05:08:06 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


Please name your source/evidence that says he's not allowed to own a firearm.  And why would the state give him a concealed carry permit if he wasn't allowed to have guns?

Are you reading a different article then the rest of the class...?
 
2013-08-10 05:10:56 PM
I'm a big old bunny hugging, tree worshipping freak, but this is wrong. They should give the guy his gun back.

They'd get reamed if they stole his watch or cell phone. This is not very different.
 
2013-08-10 05:12:10 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


Actually it pretty much does. To become a prohibited person, as in someone the government says can't have a gun, you have to have done one of a few certain things. A felony conviction will do it, as will a misdemeanor DV conviction, so will being charged with a felony with a jail term of more than a year. However almost all of the things are criminal. The only thing that aren't is if you have dishonorably discharged from the military or if you have been committed to a mental institution (or adjudicated mentally defective). Well you can also lose the right by renouncing your US citizenship, but then you can't stay in the US either so it is kinda moot. There is no provision for "because we don't think you should" or "because we don't like you".

So they have to have a specific reason to take this guy's gun. If he's not being charged with a crime and doesn't have a criminal record, then they have to give it back. Remember that, like it or not, firearm ownership is an enumerated right meaning it is subject to protections. It isn't something that can be revoked for no reason.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/how-to/identify-prohibited-persons.html
 
2013-08-10 05:14:39 PM
I believe that the lawsuit has more to do with staying 3 nightsin the pokey.  Do you think he would be this pissed if he wasn't unlawfully imprisoned?  I would sue the shiat out of him as well.  The police have far too much control now as it is.  The NRA should be doing this case pro bono.
 
2013-08-10 05:15:25 PM
No. The police do not get to steal ANYTHING from citizens. EVER. Even guns. What the f*ck, cops.
 
2013-08-10 05:16:19 PM
The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

But he was never charged, and his attorney, J. Gary Seewald, says Washington does not have a criminal record.


Why isn't this guy suing for false arrest and imprisonment also?
 
2013-08-10 05:16:32 PM
"Washington's lawsuit alleges that Washington called police about 2:30 a.m. Feb. 10"

that was his first mistake right there.
 
2013-08-10 05:17:25 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


Know how I know you didn't read the article?
 
2013-08-10 05:19:19 PM
Popcorn anyone?
 
2013-08-10 05:20:22 PM
The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.
But he was never charged, and his attorney, J. Gary Seewald, says Washington does not have a criminal record.


Something's missing here.  They held him in jail for three days, presumably because they wrongly believed he was a felon in possession of a firearm, and he's not suing for that also?
 
2013-08-10 05:20:36 PM

zamboni: The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun

Well, except in this case it kind of is. He has a permit, a receipt and, apparently, no felony record.

That is to say, it never should have been seized in the first place and should now be returned.


Permit (possibly invalid*), receipt, and allegedly no felony record.

*based on the possible felony record
 
2013-08-10 05:24:12 PM
With a name like Washington, the cops reasoning should be quite obvious.
 
2013-08-10 05:25:23 PM
No matter how you feel about guns, you should not like any precedent which says the police can take what you have and not give it back.
 
2013-08-10 05:26:09 PM

panfried: With a name like Washington, the cops reasoning should be quite obvious.


That's what i was thinking.
 
2013-08-10 05:26:53 PM

ltdanman44: "Washington's lawsuit alleges that Washington called police about 2:30 a.m. Feb. 10"

that was his first mistake right there.


Yep.

And remember this, when seconds count, the cops are only 20 minutes away.
 
2013-08-10 05:27:02 PM

Satanic_Hamster: The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun

Please name your source/evidence that says he's not allowed to own a firearm.  And why would the state give him a concealed carry permit if he wasn't allowed to have guns?

Are you reading a different article then the rest of the class...?


liberals get to be liberal with the truth
 
2013-08-10 05:28:09 PM

arcas: Something's missing here.  They held him in jail for three days, presumably because they wrongly believed he was a felon in possession of a firearm, and he's not suing for that also?


That bothers me too. Why isn't the guy complaining about a false arrest? All he wants is his gun back. Something is definitely missing from this story.
 
2013-08-10 05:33:40 PM
.38 Taurus?  What, like $60 at a pawn shop?  Police did him a favor.
 
2013-08-10 05:36:41 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


The man does not have a criminal record.  He is not a felon.  He has a valid conceal carry permit.  Ergo he was arrested under false pretenses.

This isn't even the much abused asset forfeiture crap the police love to use to steal property.
 
2013-08-10 05:37:04 PM

CruiserTwelve: arcas: Something's missing here.  They held him in jail for three days, presumably because they wrongly believed he was a felon in possession of a firearm, and he's not suing for that also?

That bothers me too. Why isn't the guy complaining about a false arrest? All he wants is his gun back. Something is definitely missing from this story.


The writer screwed up. He's suing for a lot more than just the amount of the gun and fees. But the gun is what the article is focused on...
 
2013-08-10 05:39:46 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


Charges were dropped because he wasn't a felon.
 
2013-08-10 05:40:17 PM
If they did in fact wrongfully take it and he has no criminal record nor did anything wrong, he deserves it back and the police officers involved and department should be penalized with fines. Make them pay punitive damages.
 
2013-08-10 05:40:28 PM

Mike_LowELL: Nobody has explained to me why poor people are allowed to carry guns in the first place.  I hope the political right grows some balls and gets their arms in the air over this.  I can't bear to live in a world where people making under 250,000 dollars are allowed to carry guns.  As always, the history of man has been the history of poor people oppressing the rich.


"Marx and Engels taught that in order to win victory over the class enemies the proletariat had to be armed, organized and disciplined. A resolute rebuff had to be given to any attempt on the part of the bourgeoisie to disarm it."

~ Andrei A Grechko, Soviet minister of defense
 
2013-08-10 05:43:07 PM
I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.
 
2013-08-10 05:44:46 PM

CruiserTwelve: arcas: Something's missing here.  They held him in jail for three days, presumably because they wrongly believed he was a felon in possession of a firearm, and he's not suing for that also?

That bothers me too. Why isn't the guy complaining about a false arrest? All he wants is his gun back. Something is definitely missing from this story.


Perhaps a legal strategy? Get the gun back and next you take them to the cleaners for the rest. Just a guess.
 
2013-08-10 05:45:15 PM

tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.


Why are gun haters so obsessed over penis size?
 
2013-08-10 05:45:26 PM
"the city does evaluate the return of property on a case-by-case basis.''
REALLY? how about always give the citizen's property back?
ASSHOLLESSSSSS
 
2013-08-10 05:46:36 PM
They assumed he was a felon due to his skin color.


One bad apple and all that.........except when it is a group of cops all doing the same thing and the DA is involved...and the judge.
 
2013-08-10 05:46:54 PM

namatad: "the city does evaluate the return of property on a case-by-case basis.''
REALLY? how about always give the citizen's property back?
ASSHOLLESSSSSS


Yeah.  There's that whole Constitutional thing about being secure in your property and such.

Oh, right.  The Constitution died when the towers collapsed.
 
2013-08-10 05:49:06 PM

Arthur Jumbles: I'm not a fan of gun owners but this is theft by the police.


Well, we think you're pretty farking awesome! Hell, I even have your poster on my wall.
 
2013-08-10 05:51:21 PM

violentsalvation: The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun

"He spoke with officers and later told them that he had a permit to carry a concealed weapon, which was in his car, according to the suit.

He bought the .38-caliber Taurus on Feb. 19, 2011, for about $500 from Atlantic Gun and Tackle, the suit said, and he has a receipt for it.

The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

But he was never charged, and his attorney, J. Gary Seewald, says Washington does not have a criminal record."

Well it's one or the other. And if he is a felon he goes into "how about we enforce existing gun laws and charge the motherfarker? FFS" category. And if he's not a felon the cops need to give him his goddamn gun back.


$500 for a .38? Damn! Now I really wish I'd bought shares in gun companies back in 2008.

/so if old white people fear black men and buy guns, what threat would Hillary pose?
//fear of emasculation leads to ... more strip clubs and bigger trucks?
 
2013-08-10 05:51:37 PM
Subby got the headline wrong.  He didn't consent to a legal search.  The police conducted an ILLEGAL search of the man's vehicle.
 
2013-08-10 05:51:38 PM
Cops steal.  And they don't give sh*t back.  And if somebody who isn't a cop steals  your sh*t, they don't help get that sh*t back, either. Criminal justice in one more misnomered industry that grabs whatever it can get it's hands on and keeps it.  AAMOF, that's  pretty much the entire American business model in a nutshell.  Stop looking for justice in a failing society that's being dismantled by anybody with a crowbar.
 
2013-08-10 05:53:17 PM

OgreMagi: tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.

Why are gun haters so obsessed over penis size?


I don't know, but it's really annoying.  I guess it's because if you don't have a gun, you're just standing there with your dick in your hand.
 
2013-08-10 05:54:46 PM
Oh well, in this case it's a firearm.  But police departments all over the country have been seizing personal property (without any legal cause) for decades.  The court costs you'll pay aren't worth trying to get it back.  They do it because they can, and it's only going to get worse.

Don't ever, Ever, EVER travel with large amounts of cash.  The police (anywhere) can and will take that away from you and you'll never see it again.
 
2013-08-10 05:55:08 PM

ongbok: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

But he was never charged, and his attorney, J. Gary Seewald, says Washington does not have a criminal record.

Why isn't this guy suing for false arrest and imprisonment also?


yah
that's where things get strange, right?
It took them 3 days to determine that he owned and carried a gun legally?
Sounds like complete bullshiat.

My friend told me about a recent case, where it took 3 days to process his client so she could be released from prison.
That was three days after the judge said in court that the case was dismissed and she was free to go.
They cuffed her, took her back to prison for 3 days of processing.

if she were FREE, why????
sigh
 
2013-08-10 05:55:36 PM

OgreMagi: Why are gun haters so obsessed over penis size?


It's kinda like when you look at someone riding a bike and think,"Wow, that's a nice bike. I should probably ride more often. Maybe if I got a new bike I'd feel obliged to take it out. But not too nice, 'cause I don't wanna worry about it getting stolen all the time and if it gets a -tiny penis-  little dinged up I won't get bummed out. "
 
2013-08-10 05:55:55 PM
www.unitedliberty.org

Fully approves this fine police work.
 
2013-08-10 06:00:43 PM

Neighborhood Watch: The police (anywhere) can and will take that away from you and you'll never see it again.


Poor people aren't allowed to have cash.  If they have cash, that means they got it illegally.  All transactions must be recorded, or you're a terrorist.  Sound familiar?  Does anybody still think it's all college football and spiffy cars and lawnmowers on Sat. mornings and rainbow farting unicorns flying us our Burger King order while sprinkling Old Glory and fuzzy kittens o'er the land of the free?  All I can do is sit here and watch the tsunami of history repeat itself in "it can't happen here" land.  But if you get out a roll of tinfoil and tell me it's just a spring shower, you'r the fool.  Not me.
 
2013-08-10 06:03:26 PM
The only difference between cops and criminals is the paperwork.
 
2013-08-10 06:04:50 PM

the_chief: The only difference between cops and criminals is the paperwork.


And a very slight IQ bump on their MMPPI tests.
 
2013-08-10 06:16:47 PM
In other news, Louisiana is on the cutting edge of stopping nefarious money launderers.  You know, people paying in cash.

Louisiana, a recently passed a law outlawing the use of cash in secondhand goods sales.

A secondhand dealer shall not enter into any cash transactions in payment for the purchase of junk or used or secondhand property. Payment shall be made in the form of check, electronic transfers, or money order issued to the seller of the junk or used or secondhand property and made payable to the name and address of the seller. All payments made by check, electronic transfers, or money order shall be reported separately in the daily reports required by R.S. 37:1866
 
2013-08-10 06:17:38 PM
He filed a lawsuit in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court last week seeking to make the city return the gun and pay tens of thousands of dollars in damages.

"Give me my gun or I'll light the river on fire."
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-10 06:19:49 PM
ongbok:

But he was never charged, and his attorney, J. Gary Seewald, says Washington does not have a criminal record.

Why isn't this guy suing for false arrest and imprisonment also?


Because maybe that claim isn't quite true?
 
2013-08-10 06:21:28 PM
More and more I am finding that the comment that 95% of the cops give the remaining 5% a very bad name is very valid.  I grew up with the concept that the policeman was your friend and it is hard to accept that that is no longer the case.  I have never had a bad interaction with our local police but I am seeing more and more situations in which the police are acting as thugs and thieves rather than someone I should trust with my life.  I am just afraid that eventually there will be a web site that identifies all these thieves and thugs and puts out a shoot on sight on them and when that happens they will really have a reason for their paranoia as the thugs and thieves start dying.  I do not want that to happen but the upper echelon must begin housecleaning their forces to get the public's trust back.
 
2013-08-10 06:22:13 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


No criminal record = never a felon ==>allowed to own a gun
 
2013-08-10 06:27:08 PM

phojo1946: I do not want that to happen but the upper echelon must begin housecleaning their forces to get the public's trust back.


I can see where this might seem implausible while watching shampoo commercials and woofing down a Big Mac in one's well kept manse, as it were, but they don't really give a polly wolly doo dah f*ck about your trust anymore.  They got the keys to the safe.  They got the government in their pockets, the wealth in their ledgers and all they want is for you to shut the f*ck up, do as your told and keep all those IOUs moving around.  That's it.  If you're not ballin' on a nine digit check statement, that's your job, now.  You don't have to trust a chained up dog.  You simply need a really good chain.
 
2013-08-10 06:27:13 PM
Cops not being held accountable to the law? Must be one of those days whose names end in Y.
 
2013-08-10 06:28:08 PM

Giltric: They assumed he was a felon due to his skin color.


Well, if he's Black, he's probably guilty of something!

/I have relatives who are cops, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies!
 
2013-08-10 06:28:14 PM
CruiserTwelve,

What do you guys do?

Around Chicago (10+ years ago), cops never returned guns. If a cop was called on a domestic disturbance for instance, and a gun was just mentioned (Wife: "He has a gun in the attic and I'm afraid"), the cop would ask to see it and would take it in to "look at" promising to return it if it checked out.

That's the last the owner would see of it.
 
2013-08-10 06:29:34 PM

ltdanman44: "Washington's lawsuit alleges that Washington called police about 2:30 a.m. Feb. 10"

that was his first mistake right there.


This.

The police cannot and will not help you. They don't care about you, and in fact view you as a criminal they haven't caught yet.

Unless you're lying in the gutter bleeding, or someone else is, call someone else.
 
2013-08-10 06:36:58 PM
Maureen Harper, a spokeswoman for the city, said, "While we won't comment on the specifics of this particular case, the city does evaluate the return of property on a case-by-case basis.''

Why? The only evaluation you should be making is "was this property seized legally, and held because it was used in or the result of criminal activity?" If the answer to any of that is "no", you return it - it's not yours, and you've no reason to hold it. Why should there be any other concerns? I can understand keeping property if it's evidence in an alleged crime, or if it's the result of an alleged crime, but there shouldn't be any other reason as to why this guy shouldn't get his gun back.
 
2013-08-10 06:39:06 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


Then either charge him with possessing a weapon while a felon, or give him the gun back. This seizure leaves his property rights in limbo - "You didn't commit a crime, nor were you charged with a crime, but we're going to go ahead and punish you all the same for that non-crime."
 
2013-08-10 06:43:32 PM
Tens of thousands?  Considering all the million dollar lawsuits out there for lesser offenses, I'm not sure what has got Subby's panties in a wad on this one.
 
2013-08-10 06:45:35 PM

LavenderWolf: ltdanman44: "Washington's lawsuit alleges that Washington called police about 2:30 a.m. Feb. 10"

that was his first mistake right there.

This.

The police cannot and will not help you. They don't care about you, and in fact view you as a criminal they haven't caught yet.

Unless you're lying in the gutter bleeding, or someone else is, call someone else.



Gun in one hand, phone in the other.  Seems like he already had the right tool for the job instead of ordering delivery.
 
2013-08-10 06:45:58 PM

CruiserTwelve: arcas: Something's missing here.  They held him in jail for three days, presumably because they wrongly believed he was a felon in possession of a firearm, and he's not suing for that also?

That bothers me too. Why isn't the guy complaining about a false arrest? All he wants is his gun back. Something is definitely missing from this story.


I imagine his lawyer thinks the police could justify a claim of probable cause and it would be a waste of time. Maybe false arrest is a high bar to hurdle in that particular jurisdiction.
 
2013-08-10 06:46:28 PM

06Wahoo: Tens of thousands?  Considering all the million dollar lawsuits out there for lesser offenses, I'm not sure what has got Subby's panties in a wad on this one.


:  /

:  \

:  |


Seriously?
 
2013-08-10 06:46:34 PM
violentsalvation:  Well it's one or the other. And if he is a felon he goes into "how about we enforce existing gun laws and charge the motherfarker? FFS" category. And if he's not a felon the cops need to give him his goddamn gun back.

Agreed. But it's hard to determine from the article if the guy is actually a former felon. You'd think that would be easy enough for a journalist to double-check, since there are databases out there for those sorts of things. But apparently they're content just to write quotes and not do any research.

/Checked one such database really quick, but "Derrick Washington" is too generic of a name to be sure.
 
2013-08-10 06:51:20 PM
I hope the city looses big on this, and I hope it becomes a trend of suing the cities for large sums of money because the thieves will never pay otherwise.
 
2013-08-10 06:54:13 PM

panfried: With a name like Washington, the cops reasoning should be quite obvious.


Yeah, never return a gun to a guy who managed to start a war by shooting a French diplomat.
 
2013-08-10 06:56:33 PM

FormlessOne: Maureen Harper, a spokeswoman for the city, said, "While we won't comment on the specifics of this particular case, the city does evaluate the return of property on a case-by-case basis.''

Why? The only evaluation you should be making is "was this property seized legally, and held because it was used in or the result of criminal activity?" If the answer to any of that is "no", you return it - it's not yours, and you've no reason to hold it. Why should there be any other concerns? I can understand keeping property if it's evidence in an alleged crime, or if it's the result of an alleged crime, but there shouldn't be any other reason as to why this guy shouldn't get his gun back.


Maureen Harper seems to be saying "I can't tell you, but there's a good reason we're not returning his gun." I'd like to see the city's response to his lawsuit affidavit. It would seem to me that, in light of the lawsuit and the bad publicity, the city would be glad to return the gun if there wasn't a good reason to keep it. I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.
 
2013-08-10 06:56:37 PM
he should get it back,
then go shooting cops with it
 
2013-08-10 07:10:26 PM
A lot of cops don't become cops to help people.  They become cops to be the bully who has the teacher conned into thinking they're angels. They become cops because it's a license to do as you f*cking well please.  No catch.  No consequences.  It's a con. It's a pose.  It's a front.  It's a great way to get paid for shaking down people for their lunch money at recess.

It didn't used to be this way.

Believe it or not, money was once looked upon as a tool to effect results and support an economy to serve the people. Not god. Hard to blame them in a society that says it is, indeed, god, though.  Sprinkle in the curse of Atahualpa and some steroids and you got people who will f*ck their own mothers on CNN live to have the most expensive car.  All the sudden, that boring suburb looks a lot more inviting than that video game dystdopia that would be "so rad!"

Your property, oh urban dweller, is just souvenirs.  One gang or another will try and take them and you're not going to get them returned by either.  There's a whole lot of "because f*ck you, that's why" in your future, citizen.  Because there's nothing left to do with the game but hit the reset button.
 
2013-08-10 07:11:26 PM

mrEdude: he should get it back,
then go shooting cops with it




You sound like a tough guy.
 
2013-08-10 07:13:30 PM
This is asinine, for the police department. If he's a legal owner and has registration for the gun, they have no right to keep it unless it is evidence for a crime.

Legal searches, how do they work, yo?
 
2013-08-10 07:14:06 PM

bunner: Neighborhood Watch: The police (anywhere) can and will take that away from you and you'll never see it again.

Poor people aren't allowed to have cash.  If they have cash, that means they got it illegally.  All transactions must be recorded, or you're a terrorist.  Sound familiar?  Does anybody still think it's all college football and spiffy cars and lawnmowers on Sat. mornings and rainbow farting unicorns flying us our Burger King order while sprinkling Old Glory and fuzzy kittens o'er the land of the free?  All I can do is sit here and watch the tsunami of history repeat itself in "it can't happen here" land.  But if you get out a roll of tinfoil and tell me it's just a spring shower, you'r the fool.  Not me.


This old man highly approves bunner's message.
 
2013-08-10 07:15:36 PM

HempHead: mrEdude: he should get it back,
then go shooting cops with it

You sound like a tough guy.


Tough guys, thieves, hypocrites, witless slags.. what's the difference?  Nobody is tough enough to change the channel.  You sound smirky and 15.  We all have our cross to bear in this dime store cesspit that was once a reasonably free society.
 
2013-08-10 07:17:46 PM

CruiserTwelve: I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.


It's not like the "city" is going to pay for their mistakes.

That comes out of the taxpayers pocket.

There is no incentive to not be dicks.
 
2013-08-10 07:20:04 PM

houstondragon: This is asinine, for the police department. If he's a legal owner and has registration for the gun, they have no right to keep it unless it is evidence for a crime.

Legal searches, how do they work, yo?


There are no registration requirements here.
 
2013-08-10 07:24:14 PM

WTFDYW: Popcorn anyone?


got any white chedder?
 
2013-08-10 07:25:29 PM

CruiserTwelve: FormlessOne: Maureen Harper, a spokeswoman for the city, said, "While we won't comment on the specifics of this particular case, the city does evaluate the return of property on a case-by-case basis.''

Why? The only evaluation you should be making is "was this property seized legally, and held because it was used in or the result of criminal activity?" If the answer to any of that is "no", you return it - it's not yours, and you've no reason to hold it. Why should there be any other concerns? I can understand keeping property if it's evidence in an alleged crime, or if it's the result of an alleged crime, but there shouldn't be any other reason as to why this guy shouldn't get his gun back.

Maureen Harper seems to be saying "I can't tell you, but there's a good reason we're not returning his gun." I'd like to see the city's response to his lawsuit affidavit. It would seem to me that, in light of the lawsuit and the bad publicity, the city would be glad to return the gun if there wasn't a good reason to keep it. I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.


So you're basically saying "You don't have anything to worry about if you aren't doing something wrong". That is a comforting thought.
 
2013-08-10 07:34:02 PM

ZzeusS: .38 Taurus?  What, like $60 at a pawn shop?  Police did him a favor.


My thoughts exactly, you'd think he'd want to tip them for taking it off his hands.
 
2013-08-10 07:37:19 PM

n0nthing: ZzeusS: .38 Taurus?  What, like $60 at a pawn shop?  Police did him a favor.

My thoughts exactly, you'd think he'd want to tip them for taking it off his hands.


In a situation where I need to defend myself against violence, I'd rather have a working, loaded .38 Cal. Taurus than gun snob cred.
 
2013-08-10 07:40:59 PM

bunner: n0nthing: ZzeusS: .38 Taurus?  What, like $60 at a pawn shop?  Police did him a favor.

My thoughts exactly, you'd think he'd want to tip them for taking it off his hands.

In a situation where I need to defend myself against violence, I'd rather have a working, loaded .38 Cal. Taurus than gun snob cred.


"Working" and "Taurus" really don't belong in the same sentence.  Mostly kidding, berating Taurus's whenever the chance arises is ingrained at a biological level.  You can happen across a functional one now and then.
 
2013-08-10 07:44:06 PM

n0nthing: "Working" and "Taurus" really don't belong in the same sentence.


That fully expected response took precisely 2 min longer than I thought.   :  )  Don't really give a sh*t about the whole gun / music / beer / wine / car snob thing, but if that keeps your knickers moist, rock on.
 
2013-08-10 08:00:50 PM
He should be forced to sell it and pay the difference in price to get a new Glock.
 
2013-08-10 08:09:06 PM

OgreMagi: tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.

Why are gun haters so obsessed over penis size?


Because of trolling and/or shiatposting.
 
2013-08-10 08:22:44 PM

violentsalvation: Well it's one or the other. And if he is a felon he goes into "how about we enforce existing gun laws and charge the motherfarker? FFS" category. And if he's not a felon the cops need to give him his goddamn gun back.


My guess is that the cops didn't like the look of the guy and assumed he was a felon. When it turned out that he was not in fact a convicted felon unable to legally possess a firearm, the cops took the attitude "I still say he's a felon, even if he's never been convicted of anything. Who needs judges? I'm a po-lice ossifer and I declare him a felon"

Odds that the gun is now the "property" of a cop and can't be located on any inventory?
 
2013-08-10 08:28:12 PM

AndreMA: Odds that the gun is now the "property" of a cop and can't be located on any inventory?


Don't be silly.  It's next to all of that stolen property that was held until the cases were dispensed in 1997 and that 190 tho... I mean, 279.00 in illegally confiscated cash just waiting for those lazy citizens to fill out the correct forms.
 
2013-08-10 08:32:57 PM

tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.


I recommend that you consult a psychiatrist regarding your evident inability to control your compulsion to inappropriately discuss male genitalia in conversations regarding other subjects.
 
2013-08-10 08:42:52 PM

edmo: Legal is legal, illegal is illegal, private property remains that, and due process is always required.


You aren't familiar with civil asset forfeiture, are you? (No, launching a big-court lawsuit after the fact to try to get your stuff back, with the presumption the police get to keep it, isn't due process.)
 
2013-08-10 08:52:46 PM
CruiserTwelve:
Maureen Harper seems to be saying "I can't tell you, but there's a good reason we're not returning his gun." I'd like to see the city's response to his lawsuit affidavit. It would seem to me that, in light of the lawsuit and the bad publicity, the city would be glad to return the gun if there wasn't a good reason to keep it. I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.

Cops don't do this where you're from? It's standard behavior in most of the places I've lived. You have to jump through hoops to get anything back if it's "confiscated", if it's a firearm, you can basically forget it.  Especially if it's a nice firearm. Or a ski boat in good shape. Or basically anything someone at the precinct takes a liking to.

That pistol's at some cop's house or they sold it at the next gun show. At least that's what would have happened to it here.
 
2013-08-10 09:05:20 PM

Dimensio: tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.

I recommend that you consult a psychiatrist regarding your evident inability to control your compulsion to inappropriately discuss male genitalia in conversations regarding other subjects.


Dick jokes are always appropriate.
 
2013-08-10 09:24:50 PM
With that kinda scratch. he can buy a S&W, or a gun that doesn't have a big chance of blowing up in your hand...
 
2013-08-10 09:34:35 PM

tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.


So I take it that if the police took one of your possessions that cost you $500.00, for no legal reason and refused to give it back we would all be invited to mock the size of your genitalia if you complained.

Did I get the rules right?
 
2013-08-10 09:46:09 PM

CruiserTwelve: FormlessOne: Maureen Harper, a spokeswoman for the city, said, "While we won't comment on the specifics of this particular case, the city does evaluate the return of property on a case-by-case basis.''

Why? The only evaluation you should be making is "was this property seized legally, and held because it was used in or the result of criminal activity?" If the answer to any of that is "no", you return it - it's not yours, and you've no reason to hold it. Why should there be any other concerns? I can understand keeping property if it's evidence in an alleged crime, or if it's the result of an alleged crime, but there shouldn't be any other reason as to why this guy shouldn't get his gun back.

Maureen Harper seems to be saying "I can't tell you, but there's a good reason we're not returning his gun." I'd like to see the city's response to his lawsuit affidavit. It would seem to me that, in light of the lawsuit and the bad publicity, the city would be glad to return the gun if there wasn't a good reason to keep it. I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.


Ms. Harper doesn't "seem to be saying" anything. The correct word for this is insinuating, which is something rather different. Decent, honest people say things; honorless dogs insinuate. "Spokeswoman" is newspeak for propagandist. As usual, your comment serves only to illuminate your credulity and bias. In light of the lawsuit, I would think that returning the gun now might be tantamount to an admission of error, and keep in mind he isn't just asking for his gun back, he's also suing for thousands of dollars. As to why they may have kept it without good cause, I prefer not to ascribe to malice what can easily be explained by incompetence; perhaps paperwork was botched somewhere along the line, perhaps they don't even know where the gun is any more, and when Mr. Washington complained maybe he talked to people who aren't being paid enough to give a shiat, and if something like this occurred of course they wouldn't publicly admit it.
 
2013-08-10 09:50:08 PM
So report the gun theft to the State Police. Could make for an epic trolling.
 
2013-08-10 10:06:09 PM

bunner: HempHead: mrEdude: he should get it back,
then go shooting cops with it

You sound like a tough guy.

Tough guys, thieves, hypocrites, witless slags.. what's the difference?  Nobody is tough enough to change the channel.  You sound smirky and 15.  We all have our cross to bear in this dime store cesspit that was once a reasonably free society.




You're both farking insane. You wanna know what your problem is? MTV, Playboys, and Madison farking Avenue. Yes. Let me explain something to you okay? Girls with big tits have big asses, girls with little tits have little asses. That's the way it goes. God doesn't fark around, he's a fair guy. He gave the fatties big, beautiful tits, and the skinnies little, tiny niddlers. It's not my rule. If you don't like it, call Him. Hey Mitch. Thank you. Oh guys, look what we have here. Look at this, your favorite. Oh, you like that? Yeah, that's nice, right? Well, it doesn't exist, okay? Look at the hair. The hair is long, it's flowing, it's like a river. Well, it's a farking weave, okay? And the tits. Please, I could hang my overcoat on them. Tits, by design, were intended to be suckled by babies. Yes, they're purely functional. These are silicone city. And look, my favorite, the shaved pubis. Pubic hair being so unruly and all. Very keen. This is a mockery, this is a sham, this is bullshiat. Implants, collagen, plastics, capped teeth, the fat sucked out, the hair extended, the nose fixed, the bush, these are not real women, alright? They're beauty freaks. And they make all us normal women with our wrinkles, our puckered boobs, hi Bob, our cellulite, seem somehow inadequate. Well, I don't buy it, alright? What you farking mooks, you think is that there's a chance in hell that you'll end up with one of these women you don't give us real women anything approaching a commitment. It's pathetic. I don't know what you think you're going to do. You're going to end up 80 years old, drooling in some nursing home, and then you'll decide that it's time to settle down, get married, have kids? What are you going to do find a cheerleader? Charge it, Mitch. Oh, eat me. Look at Paul, with his models on the wall, his dog named Elle Macpherson. He's insane! He's obsessed. You're all obsessed. If you had an ounce of self-esteem, of self-worth, of self-confidence, you would realize that as trite as it may sound: beauty is truly skin deep. And you know what? If you ever did hook one of those girls, I guarantee you'd be sick of her. Get over yourself. ... No matter how perfect the nipple, how supple the thigh, unless there's some other shiat going on in the relationship besides physical, it's gonna get old, okay? And you guys, as a gender, have got to get a grip, otherwise the future of the human race is in jeopardy.
 
2013-08-10 10:10:31 PM
Clearly... They lost it.
 
2013-08-10 10:15:09 PM

malaktaus: I prefer not to ascribe to malice what can easily be explained by incompetence


Under normal circumstances that would be the correct assumption.  However, when the police are involved, you should assume malice.
 
2013-08-10 10:15:58 PM
HempHead:

You have the most accurate nick I've ever seen.  Remember, when you actually cut the comedy album off of your posts, pan the fake audience L.
 
2013-08-10 10:57:41 PM
RTFA, and if everything in there is true and accurate, I would be going for at least a good million. False imprisonment and the emotional damage due to the inability to trust the local police force (like you could before, but whatever helps pad out the suit) should help to add a few extra zeros to the end of the settlement.
 
2013-08-10 11:47:58 PM

CruiserTwelve: It would seem to me that, in light of the lawsuit and the bad publicity, the city would be glad to return the gun if there wasn't a good reason to keep it. I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.


It's no about the money.  It's about the precedent that Officers always win against civilian sheep, no matter what.  To give the gun back would be a sign of weakness.

Similarly, why would an Officer care about bad publicity?  Nobody's going to lose their job or have any personal liability.  Worst case is that the public fears the Police a little more, and I'm beginning to believe that y'all actually prefer it that way.
 
2013-08-11 12:21:49 AM
Can't have a Police State without Police.
 
2013-08-11 12:40:43 AM

bunner: n0nthing: ZzeusS: .38 Taurus?  What, like $60 at a pawn shop?  Police did him a favor.

My thoughts exactly, you'd think he'd want to tip them for taking it off his hands.

In a situation where I need to defend myself against violence, I'd rather have a working, loaded .38 Cal. Taurus than gun snob cred.


This. My next carry gun will be a Colt Mustang. I used to be a .45ACP guy but now that I don't need to carry I'd honestly rather have something concealable, easy to shoot, easy to be accurate with, and something I can still customize a bit.
 
2013-08-11 12:51:17 AM
The public would be a whole lot safer if we banned the police from carrying firearms and allowed civilians to carry.  The police have become far too gung ho and are too quick to shoot before engaging their rather meager brain.  We shouldn't allow the retarded fat kid to play with dangerous weapons.
 
2013-08-11 12:54:46 AM
What would happen if the victim of one of these firearm theft-by-cop files a stolen weapon report with the police department?
 
2013-08-11 01:08:50 AM

Mr_Crink: So you're basically saying "You don't have anything to worry about if you aren't doing something wrong". That is a comforting thought.


I didn't say anything even remotely close to that. I was questioning what reason the city would have to keep the gun. It seems they have every reason to return it and no known reason to keep it.
 
2013-08-11 01:22:20 AM

The first thing I looked at: tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.

So I take it that if the police took one of your possessions that cost you $500.00, for no legal reason and refused to give it back we would all be invited to mock the size of your genitalia if you complained.

Did I get the rules right?


I have to say as this thread winds down that this was one of the least thought out trolls I have ever done on fark.  It wasn't really all that funny, original, or even remotely close to being good satire.  I am putting more thought into this summary than I did into thinking about what to write initially.  Even though it was flagrantly obvious that I was trolling, I got more than a couple bites.  It was a good day.
 
2013-08-11 02:36:22 AM

Arthur Jumbles: I'm not a fan of gun owners but this is theft by the police.


exactly. they do the same thing around here, only its restricted to confiscating them, holding them for a week (and firing them without cleaning them if mine was any indication) and then returning them only if you go down to the police department and fill out forms to request it formally.

i got one of mine back after a few days delay, with no further hassle (after the several calls back to get through the stonewalling, and after jumping through all the hoops anyway). they didn't make me go to court to get it back, but they didn't look happy i came back for it, either.
i had a local lawyer tell me that half the people don't even bother trying, and many of those that do get frustrated at the lack of information and won't run it to ground. means the cops keep half of the guns without even trying, and list the other half of the folks that do as people who are 'known armed' in the computer, and therefore treated to the full armed threat response at any contact, even a minor traffic stop or welfare check.
 
2013-08-11 02:47:24 AM
CliChe Guevara: and list the other half of the folks that do as people who are 'known armed' in the computer, and therefore treated to the full armed threat response at any contact, even a minor traffic stop or welfare check.

Bullshiat. No such database exists.
 
2013-08-11 03:01:05 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


Except, of course, that his attorney says he has no crinimal record.  If you're a felon found to be in actual or constructive possession of a firearm, it's generally a pretty easy case for prosecutors to make.  It sounds as if the person who had the gun seized was NOT a felon, the PD is just doing their typical anti-gun BS.  They NEED to be sued, and get slapped with hefty damages, to keep them from doing this crap, which violates some very basic tenets of American jurisprudence.
 
2013-08-11 03:12:48 AM

ArcadianRefugee: Permit (possibly invalid*), receipt, and allegedly no felony record.

*based on the possible felony record



They generally do perform a background check before issuing concealed permits.  They also generally require fingerprints, at least the first time out.
 
2013-08-11 03:21:10 AM

lacydog: Agreed. But it's hard to determine from the article if the guy is actually a former felon. You'd think that would be easy enough for a journalist to double-check, since there are databases out there for those sorts of things. But apparently they're content just to write quotes and not do any research.

/Checked one such database really quick, but "Derrick Washington" is too generic of a name to be sure.


Well, considering that he bought the gun from a licensed dealer (hence a background check was conducted at the time of sale) and that he had a CCW permit (hence a background check was done before it was issued) coupled with the fact that that if the police introduced evidence that he was in fact a felon his case would disappear almost instantly, it seems pretty unlikely that he was a felon.  And just to let you know:  Once you've been convicted of a felony, you're a felon, period.  The only way to become a "former felon" is to have your conviction overturned or to be pardoned, with your rights restored.
 
2013-08-11 03:27:23 AM

Giltric: CruiserTwelve: I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.

It's not like the "city" is going to pay for their mistakes.

That comes out of the taxpayers pocket.

There is no incentive to not be dicks.


Well, if Washington prevails, his attorney could ask that the damages be in the form of, say, however many new police cars.

Have you ever noticed that cops seem to have really new cop cars?  I can't recall any of the local departments around me having cars that are over 5 years old...most are less than 2 years old.
 
2013-08-11 03:33:33 AM

OgreMagi: The public would be a whole lot safer if we banned the police from carrying firearms and allowed civilians to carry.


Originally, cops were not allowed to carry guns.  Then somebody pointed out that despite being cops, they hadn't given up their basic civil rights, so they should be allowed to carry whatever weapons were legal for your average non-cop to carry.  Now, there are many cops in certain parts of the country who believe that they should be the only ones allowed to carry.  There are also many decent cops who actually understand the Constitution and the law, and respect them both.  "Me likey" the decent cops, but not so much the other kind.
 
2013-08-11 03:36:26 AM

CruiserTwelve: CliChe Guevara: and list the other half of the folks that do as people who are 'known armed' in the computer, and therefore treated to the full armed threat response at any contact, even a minor traffic stop or welfare check.

Bullshiat. No such database exists.


 the local cops certainly do have such a thing. don't know if they share it or not with the county sheriffs dept or not, but the local cops at least sure as hell do have notations on contacts with both individuals and addresses of concern in the past. name a police department that doesn't. that isn't some conspiracy theory, that is just S.O.P. for any department.

 had a co-worker that got the full 'get out on the ground' at gunpoint thing a couple times at trivial traffic stops, eventually got a lawyer to look into it after a scary event where his roommate called the police to report something minor like having his car broken into, and had the cops bust in with shotguns until they could 'secure' my co-worker as his name came up related to that address through DMV records (keep in mind that he had no criminal record AT ALL). they searched him at gunpoint in his own home, then detained him in a corner so that other officers could take his roommates totally unrelated victim report.
 his lawyer foundout this came from him having a 'known to carry small revolver' notation on his record that the dispatcher would inform any officers of when running a check on him. guess how they knew he owned/carried a revolver? they took it originally at a traffic stop where they asked if he was armed, and per the rules of having a CCW he replied in the affirmative that there was one in the car. this resulted in a violent takedown and handcuffing, search of the car, and confiscation of the revolver, later to be released without charge (but without the gun) an hour or more later.he filed the papers to get it back, and his life was not the same again.
 not the only person they did that to, either.
 
2013-08-11 03:38:40 AM
CliChe Guevara:exactly. they do the same thing around here, only its restricted to confiscating them, holding them for a week (and firing them without cleaning them if mine was any indication) and then returning them only if you go down to the police department and fill out forms to request it formally.

I've heard of cases in which the police "confiscated" a firearm, shot a LOT of corrosive ammo through it, and stored it in conditions designed to encourage rust, so when the owner finally got it back, it was basically destroyed.  At the same time, one of my legally owned machineguns ended up in a police storage locker, and once I explained to them WHY they shouldn't "test fire" it, they ended up letting UPS come and pick it up to deliver it to me in under a week.  I got it back with absolutely no damage to it whatsoever.
 
2013-08-11 03:39:48 AM
ah crap. i got suckered into responding to an officer twelve troll post. should have looked at the handle.

of course his persona would condone and support this kind of property theft.
 
2013-08-11 03:52:07 AM

Secret Master of All Flatulence: Have you ever noticed that cops seem to have really new cop cars?  I can't recall any of the local departments around me having cars that are over 5 years old...most are less than 2 years old.


Do you realize that you're talking to a cop that drives a 7 year old police car with almost 180,000 miles on it every day?
 
2013-08-11 04:14:07 AM

CruiserTwelve: Secret Master of All Flatulence: Have you ever noticed that cops seem to have really new cop cars?  I can't recall any of the local departments around me having cars that are over 5 years old...most are less than 2 years old.

Do you realize that you're talking to a cop that drives a 7 year old police car with almost 180,000 miles on it every day?


Who'd you piss off in your department???
 
2013-08-11 04:51:48 AM

Secret Master of All Flatulence: Have you ever noticed that cops seem to have really new cop cars? I can't recall any of the local departments around me having cars that are over 5 years old...most are less than 2 years old.


To be fair, cop cars get a lot of hard miles on them. What do you think the average age of taxis are in the city?
 
2013-08-11 06:20:41 AM

TopoGigo: To be fair, cop cars get a lot of hard miles on them. What do you think the average age of taxis are in the city?


Oh, I know that patrol cars get driven a lot, which is why they are replaced so often, at least locally.
 
2013-08-11 08:36:34 AM
The story as written makes me upset, but that is what makes me pause. This is from the one guys perspective, I feel like we are missing a key piece of information here. If it is true as written the police have got something coming to them big time.

Part of the reason I feel we Are missing something in this story is very simple, the gun was being stored in his car. That is a responsible gun owner. Why on earth would it be in his car for storage? That stupidity alone makes me want to take his gun away. This is what the rest of us see when gun owners are ranting about their rights. If you can't properly store your weapon you are being irresponsible.
 
2013-08-11 09:30:06 AM

CruiserTwelve: It seems they have every reason to return it and no known reason to keep it.


...and yet, they are still keeping it. That's the point. The system is either broken, or corrupt. Either way, it's not good.
 
2013-08-11 09:36:25 AM

CruiserTwelve: CliChe Guevara: and list the other half of the folks that do as people who are 'known armed' in the computer, and therefore treated to the full armed threat response at any contact, even a minor traffic stop or welfare check.

Bullshiat. No such database exists.


There certainly is a database that cops have access to. How do they, say, look up a license plate if there's no database to look it up in? How do they see if the person owning that license plate is a wanted man (or woman)? They look it up in the database. And that database will now show the fact that this man was arrested on a weapons charge. And thus, any cops who pulls him over will know he was once (and quite probably is now) armed.
 
2013-08-11 11:51:39 AM

fredklein: There certainly is a database that cops have access to. How do they, say, look up a license plate if there's no database to look it up in? How do they see if the person owning that license plate is a wanted man (or woman)? They look it up in the database. And that database will now show the fact that this man was arrested on a weapons charge. And thus, any cops who pulls him over will know he was once (and quite probably is now) armed.


You're talking about two different systems. If a cop on the street runs your license plate, the response will tell him if the car is stolen or wanted and if the driver is wanted. If the cop wants to look at your criminal history, he'll have to access another database altogether. That database is more regulated and requires a higher level of security, and also requires more input such as the reason for the inquiry. Your everyday street cop doesn't have immediate access to that.

All of that, however, requires that the cop knows your name before he can look up anything. If a cop is approaching you and you're not in your car or you're in someone else's car, the cop won't know anything about you unless, of course, he already possesses that knowledge.
 
2013-08-11 03:11:03 PM

CruiserTwelve: fredklein: There certainly is a database that cops have access to. How do they, say, look up a license plate if there's no database to look it up in? How do they see if the person owning that license plate is a wanted man (or woman)? They look it up in the database. And that database will now show the fact that this man was arrested on a weapons charge. And thus, any cops who pulls him over will know he was once (and quite probably is now) armed.

You're talking about two different systems. If a cop on the street runs your license plate, the response will tell him if the car is stolen or wanted and if the driver is wanted. If the cop wants to look at your criminal history, he'll have to access another database altogether. That database is more regulated and requires a higher level of security, and also requires more input such as the reason for the inquiry. Your everyday street cop doesn't have immediate access to that.

All of that, however, requires that the cop knows your name before he can look up anything. If a cop is approaching you and you're not in your car or you're in someone else's car, the cop won't know anything about you unless, of course, he already possesses that knowledge.


That is, until we all have to carry ID cards with an scannable RFID chip in it, right?  Then the cop will know who you are before you even stop the car.   And just about anything else he wants to know.

Ha!  But that's just crazy talk, right?
 
2013-08-11 03:48:48 PM

OgreMagi: Oh, right.  The Constitution died when the towers collapsed.


It started long before that. Possibly with the war on drugs and police seizures.
 
2013-08-11 04:19:29 PM

BravadoGT: That is, until we all have to carry ID cards with an scannable RFID chip in it, right?


You ask too many questions, citizen.
 
2013-08-11 04:24:38 PM

ArcadianRefugee: zamboni: The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun

Well, except in this case it kind of is. He has a permit, a receipt and, apparently, no felony record.

That is to say, it never should have been seized in the first place and should now be returned.

Permit (possibly invalid*), receipt, and allegedly no felony record.

*based on the possible felony record


Cool, so you're ok if the cops seize and hold your car until you can prove that your alleged DL is valid, your alleged registration is valid, your alleged proof of insurance is valid and that you don't have any outstanding tickets... allegedly; or for that matter, any of your property until you prove that you actually own it?

Seems like that'll be quite an inconvenience. But, oh well... as long as you're consistent!

Good luck getting your stuff back.
 
2013-08-11 04:52:15 PM

zamboni: ArcadianRefugee: zamboni: The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun

Well, except in this case it kind of is. He has a permit, a receipt and, apparently, no felony record.

That is to say, it never should have been seized in the first place and should now be returned.

Permit (possibly invalid*), receipt, and allegedly no felony record.

*based on the possible felony record

Cool, so you're ok if the cops seize and hold your car until you can prove that your alleged DL is valid, your alleged registration is valid, your alleged proof of insurance is valid and that you don't have any outstanding tickets... allegedly; or for that matter, any of your property until you prove that you actually own it?

Seems like that'll be quite an inconvenience. But, oh well... as long as you're consistent!

Good luck getting your stuff back.


It would suck, yes, but yes: if there records show that I have a felony conviction, I expect they would treat me as having such until I get it cleared up. For them to not do so seems rather risky, and it isn't the cop's fault that faulty records exist.

After I get things cleared up I would then take action to get to the bottom of why faulty records existed, sue, etc. But I would not expect a cop to "take my word for it" that I was something other than what their records show.

/no, I don't like cops
//I avoid them when I can
///still expect them to behave a certain way
////which is why I avoid them
 
2013-08-11 04:56:41 PM

zamboni: But, oh well... as long as you're consistent!


And, yes, I try to be consistent. if I say, "The best thing for the human race right now would be if a third of the population simplyt vanished," I do so knowing full well that that means 1/3 of my friends/family (statistically) would vanish and that, as a matter of fact, I might be one of those 1-in-3 people; I don't say "People shouldn't be allowed to..." and then say, "except me, of course."

/I may still do those things, but I shouldn't be allowed to...
 
2013-08-11 05:00:30 PM

CruiserTwelve: fredklein: There certainly is a database that cops have access to. How do they, say, look up a license plate if there's no database to look it up in? How do they see if the person owning that license plate is a wanted man (or woman)? They look it up in the database. And that database will now show the fact that this man was arrested on a weapons charge. And thus, any cops who pulls him over will know he was once (and quite probably is now) armed.

You're talking about two different systems.

First you say there is no such database, and now you say there's actually TWO. Make up your mind.

And as for your 'they'd have to know your name- that's in the first DB they look in, the one that links to your drivers license and (less accurately) your license plate.

 
2013-08-11 05:17:02 PM

namatad: OgreMagi: Oh, right.  The Constitution died when the towers collapsed.

It started long before that. Possibly with the war on drugs and police seizures.


That's when they started choking the life out of the Constitution. They chopped its head off on 9/11.
 
2013-08-11 05:23:11 PM

zamboni: ArcadianRefugee: zamboni: The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun

Well, except in this case it kind of is. He has a permit, a receipt and, apparently, no felony record.

That is to say, it never should have been seized in the first place and should now be returned.

Permit (possibly invalid*), receipt, and allegedly no felony record.

*based on the possible felony record

Cool, so you're ok if the cops seize and hold your car until you can prove that your alleged DL is valid, your alleged registration is valid, your alleged proof of insurance is valid and that you don't have any outstanding tickets... allegedly; or for that matter, any of your property until you prove that you actually own it?

Seems like that'll be quite an inconvenience. But, oh well... as long as you're consistent!

Good luck getting your stuff back.


Now imagine the cops seizing EVERYTHING you own won't give it back until you prove you own it.  How many of your personal effects do you have receipts for?  I can prove two things.  My motorcycle and my car.  That's it.  All my clothes, furniture, appliances, computers, several hundred books etc, I doubt I have receipts for any of them.  Would a two year old picture of me holding my electric bass be considered adequate proof?  Only if the police are in a good mood.  Which means, not farking likely.
 
2013-08-11 05:41:27 PM

OgreMagi: How many of your personal effects do you have receipts for?


Actual receipts? Few. But credit card statements going back to [whenever] and presumably from there I can get more detailed information. Like I said, yes, it would be annoying, but also like I said, I wouldn't expect them to behave differently "just for me" which is why I avoid them as best I can.
 
2013-08-11 05:56:27 PM

ArcadianRefugee: OgreMagi: How many of your personal effects do you have receipts for?

Actual receipts? Few. But credit card statements going back to [whenever] and presumably from there I can get more detailed information. Like I said, yes, it would be annoying, but also like I said, I wouldn't expect them to behave differently "just for me" which is why I avoid them as best I can.


My bank records don't normally show what I bought, just where I made the purchase.
 
2013-08-11 08:16:41 PM

CruiserTwelve: Secret Master of All Flatulence: Have you ever noticed that cops seem to have really new cop cars?  I can't recall any of the local departments around me having cars that are over 5 years old...most are less than 2 years old.

Do you realize that you're talking to a cop that drives a 7 year old police car with almost 180,000 miles on it every day?


How do you drive 180,000 miles every day?
 
2013-08-11 08:25:45 PM
fredklein:First you say there is no such database, and now you say there's actually TWO. Make up your mind.

C'mon Fred, you know what I was replying to. There is no database available to police that lists anyone as "known armed." Yes, there is a criminal history database that will show if you've been previously arrested for an offense involving arms, but it's not immediately available to your average street cop. I can't run your license plate and find out if you're "known armed."

And as for your 'they'd have to know your name- that's in the first DB they look in, the one that links to your drivers license and (less accurately) your license plate.

As a cop approaches you, he doesn't know your name so he has no information about you. He obviously can't access any information about you until he knows who you are. If the cop runs your license plate he can access information about your car and some information about the registered owner. If you're the driver but not the registered owner, the cop still doesn't know anything about you until he gets your name and runs it.

Why are you always so obtuse?
 
2013-08-11 11:28:49 PM

CruiserTwelve: C'mon Fred, you know what I was replying to. There is no database available to police that lists anyone as "known armed."


the dispatcher has notations that come up from somewhere, made locally by other officers. they seem to know how many times certain kinds of calls have been made to an address and other red flags to watch out for that make perfect sense for officers to be aware of going into situations with people unknown to them. things not part of NCIC or even local arrest records. even stuff the cops shouldn't know. hell, it even lists if someone pawned any firearms or other weapon locally before. i don't know how it works, only that it does.

if you are really a police officer, you have to be aware of this. to claim not to know anything about that is what is truly acting obtuse.

 the fact that some localities are adding flags for known gun owners is disturbing, but not surprising. its been documented in other communities as well. this isn't some random tinfoil hat thing no matter how much you would like to dismiss it as such.
 
2013-08-12 01:08:25 AM
CruiserTwelve:

C'mon Fred, you know what I was replying to. There is no database available to police that lists anyone as "known armed." Yes, there is a criminal history database that will show if you've been previously arrested for an offense involving arms, but it's not immediately available to your average street cop. I can't run your license plate and find out if you're "known armed."

However, you guys DO know I have a CCW right off the bat. That certainly seems to predispose the LEO I'm interacting with to assume I AM armed. At least it has so far. More, whatever local database they're accessing seems to have annotations from previous encounters. To wit, I have been interacting in a calm, nearly friendly manner with a LEO who was trying to ascertain my BAL coming out of my favorite local dive, the Florabama. Our major contractor has this pesky personal behavior clause which precludes me from having more than two drinks in public, so I'm at about a .01. I offer to skip the test and go right for the breathalyzer. He's about to let me go when over the radio comes "Be advised subject may be armed and can be violent". Given that I was on a motorcycle and look medium large and unsavory, he jumped to the obvious conclusion and went all Barney. Well, I wasn't armed, I do have a carry permit, and where the other came from I don't know. I do know it didn't come from NCIC or the FBI database, because if they had checked there they'd have seen I am a known, registered, government approved "good guy".


 If you're the driver but not the registered owner, the cop still doesn't know anything about you until he gets your name and runs it.


If I were a LEO, if I ran your plate and the registered owner came back as a CC permit holder, I'd jump to the somewhat reasonable assumption that the driver might be that person, and might be armed. Unless the registered owner was "Lisa" and you're a guy or something. Even then, I'd assume the vehicle might have a firearm in it somewhere due to the owner being a permit holder.
 
2013-08-12 02:02:28 AM

erewhon: whatever local database they're accessing seems to have annotations from previous encounters...He's about to let me go when over the radio comes "Be advised subject may be armed and can be violent".


Exactly. Sounds like -exactly- what they do here.

I suspect BootlickerTwelve is either;
a)not a real cop, just a wannabe, and has no real knowledge one way or the other
b)does have the knowledge, and is lying just to further the apologist agenda, or
c)all of the above
 
2013-08-12 02:43:06 AM

CliChe Guevara: the dispatcher has notations that come up from somewhere, made locally by other officers. they seem to know how many times certain kinds of calls have been made to an address and other red flags to watch out for that make perfect sense for officers to be aware of going into situations with people unknown to them. things not part of NCIC or even local arrest records. even stuff the cops shouldn't know. hell, it even lists if someone pawned any firearms or other weapon locally before. i don't know how it works, only that it does.


That's a dispatch database that contains information about certain addresses. It varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but generally provides information about prior calls to that address or "flags" for safety concerns like threats made against officers. In my jurisdiction at least, it will not show prior convictions or any prior arrest information for the residents.

When I run a license plate prior to making a traffic stop, I get the following information: Whether the car is stolen or wanted for some crime, and the registered owner's information. The system will then check the registered owner's name and show whether there are any warrants for someone of that name. In addition to warrants, it will show if a person with that name has a CCW permit, is a registered sex offender or flagged as a gang member. If the registered owner has a common name, I might get many hits which I don't have the time to page through before making contact with the driver.

What I WON'T have available is the registered owner's criminal history. That's in another, more secure, database.

In other words, as I've said before, I won't know if the driver is "known armed" when I approach him. I might know if he has a CCW permit, but generally cops aren't worried about them. CCW holders are almost always responsible people.
 
2013-08-12 02:53:56 AM
Well, there sure seems to be a local database of some sort they contribute to. I couldn't get an explanation from the guy after the fact where the "may be violent" thing came from, other than there was a strong insinuation that someone I knew had put it in there as a joke, haha.

I think Cruiser is a real cop, and in his area they might NOT have a local notes file. I can see why they might want such a thing. It wouldn't be hard to set up. I'm not talking nationwide, just some sort of local cop sql server with some access wrappers.

In my case, before I got tired of it, I used to teach IDPA point-shoot and knew some of the SWAT guys as students. I'm guessing one of them was the evil culprit. Had they pinged the FBI server it will tell you I'm the CSSO/FSO at a local shrine to the military/industrial complex, and thus technically a fed. I even haz me a badj an a ID. They're in my desk somewhere. I think the NCIC does too, but I don't have access to it and apparently cops aren't supposed to just look for no reason so I've never been able to prove it one way or the other.
 
2013-08-12 03:02:11 AM

CliChe Guevara: I suspect BootlickerTwelve is either;
a)not a real cop, just a wannabe, and has no real knowledge one way or the other
b)does have the knowledge, and is lying just to further the apologist agenda, or
c)all of the above


There's an incredible number of assumptions and misbeliefs about cops on Fark and I try to correct those when I can. Yes, I assure you I'm a real cop. I try to be straightforward and accurate in my posts, but I speak from my own personal experience which is quite abundant. I try to make it clear that things may be different in other jurisdictions, but some people want to believe that every police agency is identical. That's the kind of lazy thinking that I try to combat.

I'm often called a "bootlicker," but I call 'em as a see 'em. Sometimes the cop hate on Fark is based on misconceptions or a lack of understanding of police procedures, and I try to correct those. Those that have actually followed my posts know that I've been as critical of bad cops as anyone else. I, however, know that those "bad cops" are the minority that get all the publicity. While I won't defend every member of my profession since they vary widely in their actions, motivations and beliefs, I will defend my profession as a whole. The vast majority of cops are good, hard working, decent people that would take a bullet for you. The good guys just don't get the publicity that the bad guys do.
 
Displayed 147 of 147 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report