Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights
January 19, 2013 by CopBlock 14 Comments
When you see "CopBlock" as the author it means it was submitted via our submission tab - you can share your story too. If you enjoy this content and/or believe "Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights" get yourself some CopBlock Gear from our store or donate just $1/month to the CopBlock Network.
Apparently the video/incident happened when there was no ‘accidental display’ clause in Fla CCW law.
“…Careless Exhibition of a Firearm under Florida Law
We all know that Florida law allows a person who possesses a valid permit to carry a “concealed” weapon. Many people do not realize that it is a first degree misdemeanor to “carelessly” exhibit the firearm to another. This misdemeanor crime is one of the most commonly prosecuted firearm charge in Florida, although it is unclear how many times these prosecutions involve careless acts as opposed to intentional acts since the statute allows either.
Florida Statute Section 790.10 is entitled, “improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms.” The statute provides as follows:
“if any person having or carrying any . . . weapon shall, in the presence of one or more (other) persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree….”
He should told the Leo he had a gun right away. I know 2nd Amendment supporters are going to say differently but when you have a CCW in FL, you are obligated to inform the leo that you are licensed and you have a weapon concealed. The leo overreacted but a judge is going to tell the citizen that he should informed the deputy after the leo approached him.
Under some statutes, the CCW holder must declare their are armed.
This LEO completely overreacted, and was quite overzealous in his situational control management. “Put your hands right there (while LEO weapon drawn, with no provocation) or I’ll shoot you in the FUCKING back!”….”I don’t care if he has a permit or not”. Which shows this LEO’s blatant disregard for the laws he chooses not to enforce.
This citizen, had no legal expectation to inform the LEO he was Concealed Carrying. If the LEO would have asked, the citizen would have to inform.
790.053 Open carrying of weapons.—
(1) Except as otherwise provided by law and in subsection (2), it is unlawful for any person to openly carry on or about his or her person any firearm or electric weapon or device.
It is not a violation of this section for a person licensed to carry a concealed firearm as provided in s. 790.06(1), and who is lawfully carrying a firearm in a concealed manner, to briefly and openly display the firearm to the ordinary sight of another person, unless the firearm is intentionally displayed in an angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense.
Also, never get out of the car unless the leo demands it. That’s the first really stupid thing. Sit there with your hands on the steering wheel and when the leo comes up to the window, just inform him that you have a ccw and have a weapon. What’s the big deal with that? If the leo overreacts to that, then there’s a problem.
i love the petulant tone of voice when the cop finally hits on a charge he can toss at the guy. lol.
It is a bit ironic, though, when leos want to use the dash cam they let you know over and over, but when you want the dash cam they don’t know nothin about no video.
Don’t Move! I’ll shoot you in the fucking back.
Get Up Against The Car!
Don’t Move! I’ll fucking kill you.
Get On The Ground!
Don’t Move! You’re gonna fucking die.
The right to keep and bear arms is infringed.
I also advocate informing the LEO in a traffic stop. It’s not legally required where I live, but I think it’s the best approach. Let them know you are a good guy, not a bad guy. I really like this video http://youtu.be/dT-nePQuT-s Massad Ayoob. You can be nice and have pleasant conversation, but be aware when it may change to investigation and just say you don’t want to answer any questions.
Appreciate your feedback. However, I disagree with your premise:
“I also advocate informing the LEO in a traffic stop. It’s not legally required where I live, but I think it’s the best approach. Let them know you are a good guy, not a bad guy.”
Why should we as citizens, have to prove we are a “good guy, not a bad guy” when interacting with a LEO.
You seem to absolve the actions of this LEO, as it was the citizens responsibility. This LEO overreacted and illegally arrested this individual. The law is on the citizens side, not the LEO’s. 790.053 Open carrying of weapons.
LEO’s are employed by the people, therefore shouldn’t they have to prove to us, they’re “good guy(s), not bad guys”? Could this LEO have addressed the situation in a better manner? i.e., “Sir, I see you have a sidearm there, do you happen to have a permit to conceal carry?” Much more congenial than “Put your hands right there…or I’ll shoot you in the FUCKING back!”
Well, I do not agree with or condone the LEO’s actions or statements in this matter. He definitely overreacted. You can attribute it to his concern for safety, but after watching the video, HE WAS JUST BEING A MAJOR DICK!
I think the driver could have prevented this reaction by offering his CCW permit along with his license.
I stand by my policy and I wish to defuse any such situation if I can ahead of time for myself. I am not a threat to a LEO, and I’m comfortable stating that. I have heard of MAJOR DICK LEOs causing trouble even after this voluntary admission of carrying a weapon. You are welcome to do whatever you think is right. I am willing to defend my rights vigorously. But informing a LEO that you are legally permitted and currently armed is not giving up any rights, but merely offering that the situation exists and is under control before he has the opportunity to run your license and find that you also have a CCW. How do you think he will approach the vehicle under those circumstances?
This officer deserves an unpaid vacation, maybe 60 days worth, to get his head on straight and be more professional. Until he does that he shouldn’t be allowed to carry a weapon.
Although the evidence showed that Hinton knew Sims and Myers, and knew that they were deputy sheriffs, it was the duty of Sims to inform him to consider himself under arrest, or by some other language convey to Hinton the idea that he was attempting to arrest him. Instead of doing that, he used the language of a highwayman, “Put up your hands.” And, by the way, during these times it is well known that some officers of the law have turned bandits. If it had been shown that Hinton was a desperate and dangerous criminal, a well-known killer, or a would-be killer, Sims might have been justified in proceeding as he did. Gurley v. Tucker (Miss.) 155 So. 189. ‘Must every man, innocent or guilty, put up his hands whenever commanded to do so by an officer, whether in the daytime or nighttime, and regardless of the situation and surroundings without being informed by the officer of the reason for the command? We think not. Hinton v. Sims 155 So. 141 (Miss); 158 SOUTHERN REPORTER
@ Real Common Sesnse: That prick ass cop shouldn’t be suspended, not after the way he overreacted to the man’s weapon. Telling a citizen who isn’t doing anything wrong “I’ll shoot you in the fucking back” should be grounds for termination. The cop should have first, upon seeing the weapon, asked if the man had a permit. The citizen would most likely show the permit with no problems. Second, after seeing the permit, the cop should have left him the fuck alone. If the man was pulled over for speeding, the cop should have given him a warning or citation and left it at that. Any public official who threatens to kill a citizen for no good reason should be fired immediately.