Bitcoin Forum

Police have the right to detain anyone openly carrying a gun even if no crime has been suspected or alleged, a federal judge in Michigan has ruled.
An officer in Grand Rapids, Michigan, did nothing wrong by stopping and handcuffing open carrier Johann Deffert after he was seen walking outside a church with a pistol strapped to his leg, US District Judge Janet Neff ruled this month.

Neff threw out a lawsuit arising from a March 2014 altercation between Deffert and Officer William Moe of the Grand Rapids Police Department. The NRA has offered to help with the appeal of the case.

Moe responded to a 911 call after Deffert was seen walking down the street wearing camouflage clothing and a leg holster containing an FNP-45 Tactical Pistol. That incident led to the following conversation, the suit indicates:

OFFICER MOE: “Why do you have a hand gun on you?”
PLAINTIFF: “It’s my constitutional right to defend myself.”
OFFICER MOE: “Put your hands behind your back.”
PLAINTIFF: “May I ask why I’m being stopped?”
OFFICER MOE: “Because you’ve got a handgun walking down the street.”

PLAINTIFF: “Lawful possession of a handgun is not a reason to cite me, or arrest me, or detain me, Officer.”
OFFICER MOE: “Yes, it is until I figure out what is going on.”

Deffert was handcuffed, patted down and detained until Moe’s boss, Sgt. Stephen LaBrecque, was called to the scene. LaBrecque ordered Deffert released and had Moe return his pistol.

Deffert was never arrested nor charged with a crime. Police did run his name through a database to determine whether he was legally allowed to have the gun, and the network indicated Deffert had no criminal record.

Neff’s ruling indicates that LaBrecque felt Moe could benefit from additional training in “open carry issues.” But Neff also said Moe “was justified in following up on the 911 call and using swift action to determine whether plaintiff’s behavior gave rise to a need to protect or preserve life … in the neighborhood.”

Deffert and his attorney contended that Moe violated both Deffert’s Fourth Amendment rights and Michigan’s Open Carry law by stopping and detaining him.

More...http://www.offthegridnews.com/current-events/police-now-can-detain-gun-owners-for-absolutely-no-reason-so-says-this-shocking-federal-court-ruling/ (http://www.offthegridnews.com/current-events/police-now-can-detain-gun-owners-for-absolutely-no-reason-so-says-this-shocking-federal-court-ruling/)

Two thoughts on this.

1) The Sgt. new the right from wrong with respect to the law, otherwise he wouldn't have let Deffert go immediately...this is a good sign. And it actually proves that police CANNOT detain gun owners for absolutely no reason.

2) If Deffert still feels he's being wronged, even though he was let go, he should take his appeal to Washington, that's what the appeal court system is for.

Yes, the posts says that the police can detain gun owners for no reason but if they could, they would have. They let this guy go with respect. Ofcourse, if you want to walk down the road with a gun in your hand and not expect people to be afraid or have questions, boo fucking hoo. This isn't how shit works.

I have mixed feelings about open-carrying of guns:
1a) If it is legal, then (almost) anyone should be allowed to do it without question.
1b) People (and cops) will eventually learn to get used to it.

2) I also agree that "this isn't how shit works", since open-carry looks and feels more than a bit crazy. Perhaps, concealed is better and/or I "need to get used to it".