Found on another forum I frequent. It angers me greatly when I read about mistreatment of honest, law abiding people like this..
Handcuffed, disarmed for obeying the law
Jan. 10, 2010
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
... It certainly reminded me of the stories in New Orleans after Katrina
regarding confiscating weapons from the law-abiding citizens."
And he said it's best not to bring a weapon in this kind of situation."
VIN SUPRYNOWICZ
MORE COLUMNS
Charlie Mitchener is a 61-year-old general building contractor with an office near Patrick Lane and Fort Apache Road in Las Vegas. He holds permits allowing him to legally carry concealed weapons in Nevada, Florida and Utah.
Over the past three years, his office has been broken into five times. "Three of those occasions involved me interacting with Metro," he wrote to me recently. "Each of the occasions began the same: my introduction, my presentation of my Nevada drivers license and my concealed firearms permit. Prior to today, each Metro officer simply replied thank you, proceeded with his work and then when complete there was a conversation about firearms."
Things were real different at 5:30 a.m, Jan. 3, however, when Mr. Mitchener called Metro to report the fifth break-in at his office.
"Vin, I hope I did not see the future this morning," Charlie e-mailed me. "Today was drastically different."
The responding officer was a lady cop, officer J. Rogers, badge number 13525.
"Upon presentation of my (firearms permit), the officer asked if I had the weapon on me to which I replied yes. She then said to spread my legs and put my hands behind my back. I complied and she then handcuffed me. While doing so, she said that she wanted to make certain 'that we were all safe.' "
Officer Rogers stripped Mr. Mitchener of the Glock 19 he was carrying, took the weapon and locked it in her patrol car.
"Bear in mind that she had yet to clear my office (she was waiting for backup for clearing)," Charlie writes. "So, while remote, there was the possibility that the bad guys were still in my office and would come rushing out, finding me, to their delight, handcuffed. Apparently I was not included in her comment 'that we were all safe.' It is always nice when law-abiding citizens, particularly myself, are disposable.
"An hour or so later, when she had completed her paperwork, she came back in the office; I was in the rear and did not see her enter. She came to me and said that she had put my weapon in the second drawer on the left in the receptionist's desk.
"She then said that she could tell that I was upset with being handcuffed 'like a common criminal.' I explained that I was extremely upset and told her that it was out of respect to her that I provided my (firearms permit) and that the Second Amendment did have some meaning. She replied that the reason she did what she did was because she did not know if I was a bad guy or not. ... I thought to myself, 'How absurd, I apply by the law to obtain permits, and yell it from the housetop that I have a permit and am carrying, just as I presume all bad guys do.'
"I asked if she was following procedure to handcuff me and remove my weapon to which she did not have a good answer, other than I was larger than her. ... It certainly reminded me of the stories in New Orleans after Katrina regarding confiscating weapons from the law-abiding citizens."
Another officer told Charlie that, based on J. Rogers' badge number, she had probably only been on her own for less than six months and was probably not secure in what she was doing. "It certainly makes me want to provide all the information the next time my office is broken into," he adds.
I talked to Charlie on Tuesday. He had called the concealed permit division that morning, and been referred to Internal Affairs, where he reports a detective told him, "It all depends on the officers, that if they think it's the safest thing to do they can do that. And he said it's best not to bring a weapon in this kind of situation."
Ah. So after going through all the rigmarole required to obtain a concealed weapons permit, it's best if a business owner who is the first to arrive at his office in the dawn hours to find it's been broken into not carry a weapon? Where the hell would the cops suggest would be a better circumstance into which to carry our legal self-defense weapon -- a toddler's birthday party at Chuck E. Cheese?
I contacted Metro about this incident Tuesday. Late Friday, a spokesman confirmed Mr. Mitchener's account as "generally accurate," stating the officer "acted in a way that was in the interest of her safety."
Charlie Mitchener followed the law. He has trained at Front Site and with Tactical Response and continues to regularly visit the range. Yet, "In an instant, I am in handcuffs (at 61 years old, this was a first), and there were no bad guys in handcuffs with me, just the guy who thought he was doing things correctly," he writes.
We should not be required to apply for any "permit" to carry a concealed weapon in the first place. Despite this, Mr. Mitchener did everything required of him by law, ordinance and Metro instructions.
The officer handcuffed and disarmed him "so that everyone would be safe"? What a bunch of bull. If the burglar or burglars had emerged, they would have been confronted not by two armed law-abiding good guys, but instead by one small, frightened officer and a handcuffed and disarmed legal occupant. This rendered Mr. Mitchener "safer"?
Please note that if Mr. Mitchener had not followed law, ordinance, and Metro request, if he had carried a firearm in his waistband without ever seeking a permit or informing the officer he had it, the tiny officer would have had no probable cause to disarm him, and he would likely have remained armed throughout the entire encounter. Thus, he was punished, degraded, and treated like a common criminal because and only because he attempted to follow law, ordinance and Metro's legally dubious "instructions."
The cops don't get it. The Constitution does not say "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed unless such infringement makes an officer of the government feel safer." The biggest reason the American populace are armed was never to fight off bears or wild Indians but to make agents of the government feel unsafe -- really, really unsafe -- should they try to take away our rights. That's why a citizen militia is "necessary to the security of a free state."
If these arrogant, uniformed employees of ours really want to treat us as the enemy, they may eventually get their wish, at which point they will discover they're vastly outnumbered -- and "backup" is never quite close enough to solve the problem they've created for themselves.
America in 2025, gals: Keep at it, and it can be your own private Afghanistan.
Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Review-Journal, and author of "Send in the Waco Killers" and the novel "The Black Arrow." See www.vinsuprynowicz.com/ and www.lvrj.com/blogs/vin/.
.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Handcuffed, disarmed for obeying the law
- Thread starter MrSparkle
- Start date
Here's an alternate hypothetical...
Say a woman calls the police because her husband is beating her.
One police officer show up and the woman says she has a legally-owned gun on her.
Should the officer disarm her first, knowing that domestic calls often turn into attacks on the police?
Say a woman calls the police because her husband is beating her.
One police officer show up and the woman says she has a legally-owned gun on her.
Should the officer disarm her first, knowing that domestic calls often turn into attacks on the police?
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 3,435
- Likes
- 401
It angers me greatly when someone takes a story on the internet as gospel and interpret's it in such a way as to let it anger them.
It angers ME greatly that I come to a forum to find like minded people, only to find that many members treat Police Officers with disrespect, and then whine about it when they get it back.
I'll bite - WHAT post(s) in this thread " treat Police Officers with disrespect," still less "whine about it when they get it back?"
To me this has nothing to do with respect. IDK if this went down like my posted quote. Only those there know what happened. I do know that this type of thing does happen and I find it wrong. I do respect Police Officers and what they do. I meant no disrespect by posting this. This type of issue will only be remedied by bringing it to light.
If I'm wrong then it's only my nativity, if this is what needs to be done to ensure Officers safety or if something above is misrepresented then I apologize. It just seems like the wrong people are being treated like criminals. Someone offering their LTC and freely informing of their concealed weapon does not seem like something a criminal would do. But that's my perspective, I'm not the one out there with my life on the line.
If I'm wrong then it's only my nativity, if this is what needs to be done to ensure Officers safety or if something above is misrepresented then I apologize. It just seems like the wrong people are being treated like criminals. Someone offering their LTC and freely informing of their concealed weapon does not seem like something a criminal would do. But that's my perspective, I'm not the one out there with my life on the line.
![[popcorn]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/043.gif "Popcorn [popcorn]")
Non-Compliance. Think she would have done anything?
Last edited:
It angers ME greatly that I come to a forum to find like minded people, only to find that many members treat Police Officers with disrespect, and then whine about it when they get it back.
Disclaimer: I am assuming the story is, for the most part, correct as written. It is certainly possible that it is not, but I have no evidence either way, and it is plausible.
This guy treated the police officer with respect and courtesy, and she responded inappropriately. If it was inexperience on her part, all the department would need to do is acknowledge the error. LEOs are human and they can and do make mistakes. Acknowledging those mistakes, apologizing for them, and taking steps to correct them is one of the way LEOs earn and maintain the respect and trust of the citizenry.
Jebus, talk about an unsecured weapon, wonder if the receptionist had an LTC!!! Or if the desk drawer was even locked.
It angers ME greatly that I come to a forum to find like minded people, only to find that many members treat Police Officers with disrespect, and then whine about it when they get it back.
Lol. Oh wait you're serious... I forgot cops are always justified in their actions and we mere serfs ought not "disrespect" the annointed ones by questioning them
Okay, so hypothetically speaking, would a person in this situation have any other course of action besides sitting there and taking it? I mean, the cop is clearly making an unlawful detention and illegally searching the person (not to mention seizing lawfully owned property). What can you do, besides take it and complain after the fact? What would YOU do?
So she was disarming him and handcuffing him for her safety but what about his safety? He was now a target in the event someone was still in the office. Some criminal could have jumped out of a closet shot them both and ran off. I understand the whole thing about officer safety and all but I think a case like this seems a little ridiculous. Do police cuff every law abiding citizen they come across when called to a scene just to make it "safe" for them?
Smacks of what happened in Springfield. That situation was even worse, because the LEO took his permit and gun because "he could not confirm it's validity on face value".
It angers ME greatly that I come to a forum to find like minded people, only to find that many members treat Police Officers with disrespect, and then whine about it when they get it back.
What disrespect? Someone complaining about a LEO disarming a lawfully carrying citizen is "disrespect" ? That's news to me.
-Mike
We need more OathKeepers
Well, that's alternate as in a contextually alternate universe compared to what happened in the original post.
A domestic is a whole other ball of crap compared to nearly anything else in law enforcement. I can see situations where (temporarily) disarming all parties involved in such a dispute might not be a bad idea... but in this case, if the report has any veracity to it, the actions of the LEO were completely absurd given the cooperative nature of the carrier and the context of the visit by LE.
-Mike
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 3,435
- Likes
- 401
How would that have made it different based upon the information that is given here?
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 3,435
- Likes
- 401
This... sums it up!
That was more of a side comment. However, if we had more LEOs and CLEOs that were OathKeepers (and took it seriously), they would understand actions such as this are unconstitutional.
That right there answers your question Scrivner. Same old shit every time someone mentions the Police. It just gets really over played here. There are quite a few NES members that are LEOs. It's starting to feel like being the black sheep of the family around here. As I've said before, most police Officers are pro 2A guys. Directing your anger towards authority at them isn't going to further the cause. What I mean to say is......can't we all just get along? LOL!
Do you have any officers in your department that don't respect 2a rights? If so, is anything being done to correct the actions? I think we all understand there are plenty of LEOs that support 2a rights. However, there are enough stories out there that make people feel like any contact with the police is a crap shoot. Especially the closer you get to Boston.
I understand perfectly. Probably better than YOU do, which is why I consider myself pro 2A, and pro constitution in general! I am the guy you WANT to come to your house when there's a problem, but still, I have to listen to people whining about the Police. Waaaa....I got a ticket....WAAAAAA, I got arrested.......WAAAAAA I got denied a LTC just because i beat my wife! My post wasn't so much about the article posted, it was more an attempt to get the anti-police crowd here to lighten up a bit and see that the Po Po is NOT your enemy. Perhaps the Chief of your department is a political hack, or maybe you bumped into that rookie who does it "by the book", but for the most part folks, we are on the same side. Unless of course, you got denied a LTC for beating your wife.
No. On MY department, everyone is pro 2a. It's a great place to live, and we have a low crime rate. We like it that way. When I was the LTC Officer, I would issue to ANYONE who wasn't disqualified by statute. I feel that THAT'S the way it should be. If I ever become a Chief, that's the way it WILL be. If the Commonwealth were to tell me that only Police could have guns, God damnit, i would appoint every tax payer in my town a special officer! I agree that there is an antigun sentiment in the Boston area, but that's because the place is full of, and run by LIBTARDS who have never even shot a firearm! The only time they see a gun, is when watching a Vin Diesel movie. However, the problem there is with the folks running the show, not the cop on the street.
+2 Glad to see you have that attitude about LTCs (btw, did you issue unrestricted?). Unfortunately, if you are in the 128 belt you tend to be screwed. You are right about the Libtards. I am asshamed to live in the same city as Curling Iron Coakley. The only reason I got an unrestricted LTC is due to my perfect record and profession.
radioman
NES Member
I know how you feel! I'm an NES Member and a Born Again Christian. Welcome to the Black Sheep pen!! Maybe if there ever becomes enough of us we'll get those real cool Corsairs w/the 4-50cal's to fly around in!
Hardly.
I asked you that question in Post # 4; the one you complain of is Post # 11 - seven posts LATER.
Are you seriously suggesting that arresting the citizen REPORTING the crime is proper procedure? Or even minimally competent?
If not, the remarks on this thread are warranted.
True.
But neither is tolerating the increasing abuse of the lawfully armed.
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,821
There was nothing one can do but comply. The police have a very wide latitude to detain someone in a circumstance like this for exactly the same reasons the officer articulated. There has not been a case to my knowledge where the affected person being a licensed CCW changed that.
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,821
Great. Wonderful. Now, we only need to figure out how to not only clone your department but also force one of those clones into each and every PD around the state and nation.
![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
Yeah, OK so I guess we will continue to suffer fools because that isn't possible. As a result, there are good PDs and bad PDs. Maybe you will figure out that the reason we bitch about the BAD ones is because we have to live with those or have been effected by one of those. So you can either continue to be a sensitive sally or you can get a clue and realize not every bad story about cops is a general indictment but simply an indictment of the cop in the story.
Crap, Terra broke off the chain again. LOL
But seriously, it would be great if we had PDs like yours out here, but we don't. I can't live further west because of the work I do. However, that doesn't mean my rights should be infringed upon because I have to live closer to the city.
But seriously, it would be great if we had PDs like yours out here, but we don't. I can't live further west because of the work I do. However, that doesn't mean my rights should be infringed upon because I have to live closer to the city.
Similar threads
- Locked
