LEO encounter script, first draft? Bad idea in general? Feedback welcome.

[yeager484]

I would say, about the time you get face planted into the Hood of his Squad car!

Lol well if that's what it takes to not fold like a lawn chair to the ignorant "judges" in squad cars.

My expectation is that I'll never have a bad encounter with an LEO but you know what they say about expectations vs reality:

Facebook-vs-Reality.jpg

[mrnyman]

THe liberal socialist governor of California just made it illegal for Califirnians to carry openly (albeit unloaded) he did it because not many people (voters)d id it so he knew he could get away with it , thanks yeager for your activism this country we founded by a bunch of activists who had a strange notion called freedom., if we dont carry openly here in PA we can wake up one day and that right be voted away too.

TH

[yeager484]

THe liberal socialist governor of California just made it illegal for Califirnians to carry openly (albeit unloaded) he did it because not many people (voters)d id it so he knew he could get away with it , thanks yeager for your activism this country we founded by a bunch of activists who had a strange notion called freedom., if we dont carry openly here in PA we can wake up one day and that right be voted away too.

TH

Thanks mrnyman.

Just to put it on record...I'm not trying to be a sandwich-board wearing, protesting in the streets nuisance to the police or anything. I just want to be able to stand fast to the rights the folks of our nation have died preserving.

[ronbo1012]

A hitch I see in the result the OP is seeking is the Varying degree of ego in the officer encountered. I believe this difference must be met with slight adjustments of response. The meaning should be the same but a little tweaking should be necessary to reach the same end result. Human element.

I want to be clear that I believe the law is the law and if approached by LEO who has no PC, you should be free to walk away without showing ID or answering questions. Reality, in a situation, though, may need a bit more tact to avoid an ugly mess.

[vavulaka]

I'd hate to catch a taser in my ass by just walking away.

Catch a taser in your ass - make money after you sue the department.
Eh... seems like an okay deal.

[yeager484]

A hitch I see in the result the OP is seeking is the Varying degree of ego in the officer encountered. I believe this difference must be met with slight adjustments of response. The meaning should be the same but a little tweaking should be necessary to reach the same end result. Human element.

I want to be clear that I believe the law is the law and if approached by LEO who has no PC, you should be free to walk away without showing ID or answering questions. Reality, in a situation, though, may need a bit more tact to avoid an ugly mess.

You're absolutely right.

this is strictly for those negative/borderline abusive (and sometimes more than that) negative encounters.

Not that I'd give up my rights when talking to a polite LEO, but I wouldn't have to demonstrate the same preparedness to maintain level headedness when I'm not getting bent over by the law. That level headedness would already be in the calm zone it should be in when speaking to a polite LEO

[fuzzywuzzy]

Here is another scenario and one that LEO's and their commanders dread but know can likely happen. It starts with the "man with a gun" call from dispatch with little else to go on. It happens all the time. A responding officer sees a man matching the general description in the area. He does not recognize him, he is doing nothing other than walking with an open carry and a Diet Coke. They wave at each other. The cop says to himself "He isn't doing anything illegal. This is an open carry state". With no probable cause to stop him he leaves.

The guy goes around the corner and it turns out he is not a responsible PAFOA member but is a real wackjob. He has a long criminal record from another state. He guns down the person he was heading to gun down in the first place. An old grudge come to fruition. The man dies.

The deceased family sues the cop, the police department, the chief, the mayor and the city. They explain to the jury that the officer acted negilently and with wanton, careless and reckless indifference. They explain how by avoiding "inconvieniencing for a few minutes" someone who may have been just exercising his right to open carry, the police were responsible for someone being murdered. They saw the guy and did nothing. They let him walk away with a gun without even saying a word. It could have easily been prevented. Is this what we pay them for? Aren't they trained? Women on the Jury cry.

They will win. They may win millions.

Any of our lawyer members disagree.

Devil's Advocate.

[yeager484]

Internet doesn't convey emotion well. I'm in total agreement with how that can work. It's a shame that the type of person who calls in the "man with a gun" is allowed to vote if you ask me. At least in a state where they are oblivious to current law lol.

Makes me wonder what people are thinking who report innocuous behavior.


Racist old man/woman reports someone of another race walking past their house
Nervous woman reports man walking next to her on busy sidewalk
Little guy reports bigger guy walking behind him on busy sidewalk
Driver reports a car who made the same turn as him twice in a row

I might start calling these types of things in as somewhat of an insurance policy.

[Shisno]

Here is another scenario and one that LEO's and their commanders dread but know can likely happen. It starts with the "man with a gun" call from dispatch with little else to go on. It happens all the time. A responding officer sees a man matching the general description in the area. He does not recognize him, he is doing nothing other than walking with an open carry and a Diet Coke. They wave at each other. The cop says to himself "He isn't doing anything illegal. This is an open carry state". With no probable cause to stop him he leaves.

The guy goes around the corner and it turns out he is not a responsible PAFOA member but is a real wackjob. He has a long criminal record from another state. He guns down the person he was heading to gun down in the first place. An old grudge come to fruition. The man dies.

The deceased family sues the cop, the police department, the chief, the mayor and the city. They explain to the jury that the officer acted negilently and with wanton, careless and reckless indifference. They explain how by avoiding "inconvieniencing for a few minutes" someone who may have been just exercising his right to open carry, the police were responsible for someone being murdered. They saw the guy and did nothing. They let him walk away with a gun without even saying a word. It could have easily been prevented. Is this what we pay them for? Aren't they trained? Women on the Jury cry.

They will win. They may win millions.

Any of our lawyer members disagree.

Devil's Advocate.

I disagree. Even though IANAL.

1. I am pretty sure that almost every, if not every, mass shooting or grudge come to fruitiot as you put it, the BG went with the gun concealed or tried to keep as low on the radar as possible so as not to attract attention to his pending illegal activities. Pretty much every robbery, mugging, murder what have you, depends on the lone bad guy having the element of surprise. He would lose that by OCing. Even if he is nuts, he is still sane enough to plan out his attack and carry it out. So I don't think he would risk it all by attracting a shit ton of attention to himself and losing his vital element of surprise.

2. I don't think the family would win the case. Just like the police often use the defense "We can't be expected to know every law" they will use "We can't be expected to stop every crime". They will (only during trial) have an extensive working knowledge of how RAS works and they always follow it . But because it is the letter of the law the grieving family will not win and the police will be safe.

Just my humble take on it.

[Deanimator]

"Am I free to leave? No? I have nothing further to say without an attorney present."

ONLY speak as REQUIRED by LAW, ie. notification (if CARRYING concealed under a CHL or recognized equivalent) in Ohio or VERBAL identification of yourself as required by applicable state and local law.

Make sure your audio recorder is running.

Then SHUT YOUR MOUTH until your lawyer is present.

I want NOTHING to do with the police.

That includes talking to them.

If they want to talk, they can chat up my lawyer. I hope they don't have sensitive egos.