Reader Michael in GA writes:
I’ve been populating my YouTube feed recently viewing “cop watch”, open carry, and 1st Amendment “audit” videos. I realize the attitude towards these citizen journalists from the Armed Intelligentsia varies at least as much as a caliber war.
I am neither advocating nor admonishing the activities of the civilians in these videos, be they uniformed or non law officers. I would just like to share a revealing conversation I had last night with an off duty sheriff’s deputy.
My wife’s boss invited his entire staff and their spouses to a dinner party at his lake home. He asked my wife what I would like to drink so that he could stock up on “good beer.” Apparently my reputation as a beer snob resonates at the office.
A case of Sweetwater IPA awaited my arrival and at the party, our gracious host never allowed anyone to go empty-handed. I’m talking drinks, not weapons. However, it goes without saying that I was carrying as usual, concealed. Not germane to the point, but I just wanted to set the scene.
About ten couples and the odd single enjoyed the late September mid-80-degree weather, imbibing cold drink of choice. We played a variety of games including, of course, a cornhole tournament in which the wife and I triumphed, I might add.
Among the partygoers was the boss’s son-in-law, the cop. After a boat ride and a steak dinner, I found myself chatting with the young gentleman about law as the topic of the Kavanaugh circus veered.
The following is that exchange. Don’t judge my ignorance of constitutional law. Rather, see if you get the same uneasy feeling reading the transcript that I felt hearing it first hand.
Officer [REDACTED]: “In my profession, I’m only concerned with the 4th and 14th amendments.”
Me: “What do you do?”
Him: “I’m a police officer”
Me: “I get the 4th but why jump to the 14th?”
Him: “The 14th backs up the 4th by stating the protection of citizens’ rights”
Me: “I thought it gave freed slaves their citizenship”
Him: “That isn’t all”
Me: “I know. Now we have anchor babies”
Him: “I am talking about it guarantees rights of all citizens”
Me: “What about the 5th?”
Him: “That’s only if you have been arrested”
Me: “I don’t know about that. How about the 2nd amendment?”
Him: “The 2nd protects shotguns and rifles but pistols are a little iffy”
Me: “Uhm…no. The second protects the right to all arms, knives, clubs and definitely handguns as well.”
Him: “But States can have different laws on pistols just like marriage”
Me: “Marriage isn’t even mentioned in the Constitution and you might refer to your 14th interpretation before claiming that States can infringe on gun rights”.
Him: “Well that’s just like, your opinion man”.
He really didn’t say that last part like that but the sentiment was the same.
Thoughts?
What was the point of this crappy little blog post? Cops don’t respect The Constitution. Color me absolutely surprised.
Most cops…like the rest of America…are taught very little of the Constitution …only the parts that pertain to them or might affect them and their jobs.
I work with plenty…some are pro 2A and some are not…just like the rest of the USA.
Some I can convince that it is a right of THE PEOPLE…not a militia. Some refuse to listen.
It is like religion…if they have faith in their beliefs, will be impossible to sway them…no matter how you approach them.
Well they are ignorant of most parts of the constitution that partains to their daily lives as a citizen of these United States. The fact that most don’t seem get the 4th or 2nd is as scary as a car mechanic not knowing righty tighty, left loosey.
Most cops only understand the constitution within the scope of established statutory and case law. The nuanced exceptions and the guidlines for following the constitution are generally encompassed in training, legal updates, and department policies. And they all vary between departments, counties, local court jurisdictions, states, and Circuit Court jurisdictions. Its what makes for all the lively debates here and why anything outside established SCOTUS decisions are irrelevant when we talk about these things. Some cops are strait up fascists and in their jurisdictions, they are “within the scope of the constitution”. Other cops in other places may ask you nicely to stop littering, and they’ll get fired and sued for violating that person’s civil rights…. the cop in the story may be spot on depending on the jurisdiction. He certainly sounds ignorant, but that’s through the eyes of the story teller.
Cops are paid by the state, county and local governments to enforce the laws those states enact. You could hardly expect those governments to explain to their enforcers how the laws they are enforcing are in fact unconstitutional and illegal. They’re only going to tell them what they need to know to keep their bosses from getting sued.
People speak of police as if they are some homogeneous group of robots wearing uniforms, when all they are are random people doing a job. Some are idiots, some are smart. Some know the law, others don’t. Some respect the constitution, others don’t. All of these in varying degrees, as well.
But stereotyping is much easier, especially for the anarchists here, many of whom have more in common with ANTIFA than they do with with patriotic Americans/good people.
You either have a dark, dry, humorous grasp of irony or you are completely clueless about it.
Please elaborate on what “it” is. Your comment went over my head.
Maybe not criticize “Chipotle ninjas” and groups like OCT who are out there exposing these anti constitutional cops on our behalf? Not saying you do but this situation comes close to home I considered GA and particularly my county as one of the best places to avoid tyranny.
So the point is, don’t take your rights for granted. Another point is, even when cops are not acting as an authority in uniform, it may be a case of ignorance over corruption that guides their actions.
I just felt that I would share some insight into the mind of one police officer and expose what may be part of the problem.
Sorry you didn’t glean anything from this shitty post. That’s just my free contribution.
I agree that ignorance of the law and the Constitution is the overwhelming issue with most police officers, like your “friend”. But the issue really comes into being when they refuse to educate themselves beyond what their paid state educator tells them, much less listen to a lowly non-cop civilian. This results in the “sort it out at the station” mentality. Yes, you might be deemed innocent and not face any official punishment for standing up for your rights, but you WILL be punished. Granted, it may not be official punishment, but paying bail, hiring a lawyer, missing time/income from work, and the stress of it all is quite a bit of punishment for ultimately being innocent. All because an officer refuses to take the time to educate themselves on the laws they are supposedly upholding.
+1 our viscous political overlords wouldn’t want it any other way.
Then why don’t YOU become a police officer and show us all how it SHOULD be done? Put up or shut up.
Cops shouldn’t exist. So shut up!
Was this just an ad for some beer?
Dilly dilly!
Did you get to take the rest of the case home with you?
No but won over $150 in gift cards in the games.
I think the cop was drinking them too when he ran out of Blue Moon.
He’s a statist, not surprising considering his choice of employment AND his views on constitutionally protected rights.
So many people in this world cannot think outside thier own world view, and as a result, it is how we are in this mess today.
America is no longer a “melting pot” it is now a salad bowl, with ever widening degrees of seperation between core beliefs.
More like a bowl of fruits and nuts lately, methinks.
Yup.
And flakes.
Even worse, Jeff Flakes…
Cops are a lot like city limit signs, the bigger the city the more you have, and the more cops, the more that are ignorant, idiots, or jerks. In Georgia it matters a lot if you are talking to city cop or county deputy, as the deputy has jurisdiction state wide, and likely a boss who truly supports the 2nd.
I just attended a “Standing Your Ground” course put on by the Chief Deputy of a nearby county that was a three hour course. Lots of good information and I ended up with over five pages of notes; not everyone in his position has that level of knowledge, but many do.
Maybe cops don’t know much about the Constitution, but they know more about it than the average college professor does, and waaaaay more than the average college student.
We have raised a generation of idiots taught by a generation of morons. And some of them became cops.
Brought to the nation by the NEA at your nearest government education center.
Quote: “We have raised a generation of idiots taught by a generation of morons. ”
A generation of idiots, yes. A generation of morons I’m not so sure.
The education system was targeted by the Communist Party USA in the first half of the 20th century and they have successfully taken over a substantial majority from K to graduate school. That is why we have a generation of idiots, done by design, not by morons.
Of course some of those morons may be useful fools, those who were successfully indoctrinated before they became an educator.
The whole things a Farce! Time to hit the “Reset Switch” on the American Dream! The Tree 🌳 of Liberty needs some refreshing!
If it were just that easy. When it all crumbles to the ground and you are lucky enough to not get crushed in the rubble, the globalists will seize the moment and now you are fighting giants.
I think the only hope is to maintain what we have and prop up the rotting structure until we can repair it peace by peace. That’s hard work. We can’t get lazy.
This!
To use a house analogy: We have a fixer upper. No need for bulldozers here just hard work.
Reminds me of something Sarah Hoyt wrote a few years back….
We build something new and stronger under the crumbling shell so when it collapses we already have something in place and something we control.
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2013/02/21/building-under/
Build under, build over, build around.
And when the rotten progressive Marxist edifice collapses under its own weight — or when the cracks widen enough to force our way through — our people have the resources needed to make America American again.
Sarah Hoyt is my libertarian guru. 🙂
Isn’t Agorism the logical conclusion here?
“Algorism” is not another bright idea of Al Gore although it is far enough out it could be. 🙂
“Peace by peace” nice word play
You would think (but you’d be wrong) that cops are somehow ‘experts’ when it comes to guns and constitutional rights. I’ve encountered many who are woefully ignorant about firearms in general and constitutional law. Perhaps not as bad as the media, but damn close.
I don’t need them to be experts. SCOTUS on the other hand…
I just need them to err on the side of freedom.
My surprised face comes from this cop not understanding where “You have the right to remain silent … ” Does he not understand where that came from.
When it was standard practice in Medieval Europe to literally torture a confession out an accused person.
This was considered a correct thing to do, since according to the Holy Church (run by the local despot ruling ‘King’), that confession was good for their ‘soul’, and therefore it was a good and proper thing to save their ‘immortal soul’.
It just wouldn’t be civilized to let them burn in the ‘Fires of Hell’, now would it?
Bring out the ‘Comfy Chair’ and ‘Soft Cushion’!
(Just kidding! They had fun toys like metal tongs heated red-hot in a fire to tear chunks of your flesh off of you while you were tied down to get that confession from you.)
And *that* is why we (supposedly) have the ‘Right to remain silent’.
(The ‘Miranda Warnings’ are an offshoot of that fundamental right…)
If he understands the caselaw behind it he’s got a leg up on most people and can do his job fine.
Your first mistake is thinking that “cops” are somehow in their own strata of demographics; they are still a subset of all Americans, some of whom know what they’re talking about and some who don’t. Your second mistake is seemingly coming to a conclusion with one single datum.
As a LEO (deputy) myself, who was a gun guy long before I even thought of becoming a LEO, I know other fellow cops who are big supporters of the 2A, and others who couldn’t care less. Just like my teacher friends. Or my friends in the medical fields. Or my IT coworkers (I’m also a computer guy).
As far as his thoughts on the 4th and 14th go, I don’t think he’s wrong; although we do not enforce the Constitution, we do have a duty to uphold and conform to rulings concerning it, and in our line of work, those are of particular import to us (I would also include the 8th as well). As for the 2nd…yeah, I think he’s wrong.
“Your first mistake is thinking that “cops” are somehow in their own strata of demographics; they are still a subset of all Americans”
You could say that about umpires but wouldn’t you expect them to know the rules beyond the fans’ and even players’ knowledge?
You could say that about judges or lawyers. When you are charged with enforcing rules, you damn better be more educated on those rules than citizens at large.
You’re looking at this from the wrong perspective.
To take your baseball umpire metaphor and take it further. You’d expect the umpire to know the rules of the game. Granted. But you’d also think that the rules of the game would be fairly simple to understand in order to play and only really come into play on certain “gray areas” or things of that nature. But you wouldn’t expect that, through multiple levels of hierarchy, that there would be hundreds or thousands of new “rules” published every year at the multiple levels of hierarchy that govern the game! And not only do the umpires not know all of the facets of the newly published rules but the players surely don’t.
The play is simple: just keep making more and more rules and it just becomes a drag net. Everyone is “guilty” of something at some point now it’s just a matter of them choosing to prosecute something.
Land of the free? Home of the brave? Get out of here…
Baseball is more complicated than most people realize. But you are correct that the law is way more complicated than it should be. That is why it should come down to civil rights. That is not hard to understand…if you want to understand.
Any obscure law that is broken should be pursued with a warrant and not a phishing endeavor.
What a stupid article. This sounds more like a Facebook post than a guns article. These writers are garbage.
Wife wouldn’t let me put it on Facebook.
These people know us.
Law Enforcement has and is, “us vs them”. Sure, some LEOS don’t feel or operate with this attitude and are true heroes and servants of the community. We hear the horror stories and see the now more common videos all the time. Remember folks, RIGHTS are only what gray suited government thugs, backed up by their armed forces (law enforcement) say they are. If the other side of right gains control, we are sure to see a new war on what remains of FREEDOM and LIBERTY.
Police arrest people all the time who are latter freed because the cops were wrong about the “violation”.
Police mostly study criminal law not history of the constitution. Or how the Constitution was founded. They might study “constitutional Law” that has been sanitized over the last 130 years.
That’s why you need to have “gun fighter insurance”. And hire a lawyer who knows about firearm self defense law. Most defense lawyers don’t know sh*t about this kind of law.
So you were drinking while cc? Then bragged about it online. What a dumba$$.
He didn’t say he drank the whole case. In some states I believe as long as you’re within the legal limit to operate a vehicle, you’re good to go for cc. Hell I’ve been known to have a couple beers and open carry on my own property. In Illinois even.
BAC limit in Michigan is 0.02.
Funny thing in Michigan that touches on the original post (ignorance of the law) is that, if you have a CPL, you can open carry in most gun free zones. That includes bars.
So you can saunter up to the bar with a holstered gun, order a drink, and drink it, and you’re fine so long as you don’t go above .02.
Except most people don’t know the nuances of the law so the bar tender will probably tell you to GTFO.
If the author of this garbage article is under 240 lbs, then that one beer put his blood Alcohol level above .02 percent, according to the most common used chart for DUI information. If he is over that weight, his second in the first hour put him over that limit. Most states that would be a crime.
As I see from his comment below, he does not seem to care and jokes about drinking and carrying. Totally irresponsible.
Obvious to me he can justify whatever action he takesm and is oblivious to his own ethical responsibilities in this regard.
Add to this his being proud of being a ‘beer snob’ and the host of the party felt obligated to out of his way to appease this guy.
I have formed the opinion he is an ungrateful douche bag.
His type makes the rest of us law abiding, CHL possessing folks look like the idiots the leftists portray us as.
TTAG, you can do better than print junk from this type of individual.
.
.
.
.
,
Go ahead Michael in GA, try to prove me wrong.
.
Escape Key
I drank about 9 beers and a glass of Zinfandel with my dinner later.
When I got home 7 hours later, I cracked open a can of Hoplandia to chase three fingers of Forrester 100.
Never dulled the motor skills or critical thinking. Wife and I snuggled on the couch and watched two full length movies until 1 am. Then made sweet love before retiring.
I will be damned before I let anyone tell me I need to disarm just to enjoy a day like last Saturday.
You prove me wrong.
I drink all the time and I carry all the time so it’s kind of unavoidable.
Are you saying two rights make a wrong?
“I drink all the time and I carry all the time so it’s kind of unavoidable.
Are you saying two rights make a wrong?”
No, we’re saying that you should be like the rest of us. Carrying requires a conscious decision, as does drinking. If you’re doing one, you should consciously decided to not do the other.
I carry as a habit. I made that decision years ago.
I agree Scott,
From the above reply and the one above to escape key. This guy does not seem responsible enough to own or carry a firearm. He has no issue getting hammered over the legal limit and carrying a gun
Not sure his judgement is sound.
Cops aren’t lawyers. I had a conversation once with an off-duty cop when I was talking about having guns in my trunk to go shooting at a local range between classes at the local community college.
He said it was illegal because it was a school, which is a gun-free zone. He didn’t know that Michigan law differentiates between schools and community colleges. Even after I told him there was a legal difference, he steadfastly held to his assumption that community colleges are legally the same as K-12 schools.
Cops are paid to arrest people, not really to know why they’re arresting people.
He broke the law in his state. Open carry on your own property is a different deal Perry Mason.
I could be wrong but GA State law at one time said it is illegal to discharge a firearm within three hours of consuming alcohol. No mention of BAC or if on own property.
In self defense, the above rule is waved.
There isn’t a law against drinking and carrying.
“He broke the law in his state. Open carry on your own property is a different deal Perry Mason.”
So you think open carry while *not* on his property is illegal?
*WRONG*, ‘Perry Mason’. It is perfectly legal when he is invited to do so by the property owner…
Don’t know how many times I’ve had this conversation but here goes.
Cops are not walking congressional libraries, they get enough training necessary to perform their job, maybe more, maybe less but at the end of the day they are just average citizens working a job, some with more passion than others, most with good hearts.
Just because a guy wears a badge, it doesn’t automatically make him a flawless god, not all officers share the same IQ, passion, interest, or morals.
This is why our system is the order that it is.
So RoboCop isn’t Judge, Jury, and Executioner all in one. They don’t know all of the law, nor should they. In fact, lawyers don’t know all of the law, they all specialize in certain fields, where as you are asking an officer to be proficient in more about the law than a lawyer is for 1/4-1/10th the pay.
Next time instead of getting on a high horse, offer to educate the guy/gal, some will be interested, some may not. It’s not their job to be supreme court judges.
Example: I have been training recently with local law enforcement for active shooter drills. I was surprised at the lack of gear and training they had. In my mind I assumed they would be more fluid and communicate better.
While we were sitting between exercises I asked a few of them and was surprised by the answer but it opened my mind and eyes to it. They said that type of training just isn’t available as much as you would think, on a SWAT only team more so, but locally and state level there just isn’t time, between the hundreds of hours of paperwork, the hours spent in court rooms, enough overtime to choke a horse, low on manpower, classes to keep up on what they do know, etc… that just isn’t a specialty available to them.
Now this varies from area to area greatly, but the guy in particular that I talked to told me he had been doing 70+ hours a week for several months and had finally had a weekend off the next week and all he wanted to do was get out of uniform and stand in front of a grill with some shorts on and get to spend time with his fiancee. (They were donating the time at the active shooter classes on their own dime, which we thanked them for greatly!)
So, yea, you’re going to run into professionals who don’t know everything. Part of being an adult. The older you get the more you realize half of “professionals” are just faking their way through things as best they can.
Didn’t get on my high horse. It was a little green horse actually but that’s a long story.
I feel like we had a good exchange and if he was open minded to my views then it could only have helped.
I was just bewildered that he disregarded the 1st 2nd and 5th in favor of the 14th.
Think of it this way.
Its like getting into an argument with him about why he chooses to carry a 40 Glock instead of a 45 1911 or a 1911 in 40 or a 45 sig or 357 revolver…. whatever. In your mind they all have an important place and constructive use. In his head, perhaps its because this works and was available and its what I know.
I think you’re trying to rationalize this farther than you should, you’re just lucky he even knew what one amendment was let alone be able to recite it. Did he recite it? If no, maybe he doesn’t actually know but was just regurgitating what he heard other officers talk about, that’s what it sounded like towards the end.
No he did not recite any amendment and even if someone could, it doesn’t mean they understand it.
Understanding is more important to me than memorization of the words.
The 1st says you can video police in public and you can tell them when they cross the line.
The second says you can shoot a cop if he is trying to rape you.
The 4th says you can deny him any search or seizure of your papers and effects without a warrant. (They break this one too often so I am at least glad this one respected it).
The 5th says you are not compelled to answer any questions. (Silence is not an admission of guilt)
The 14th says that if you are born in the US or naturalized, you retain all rights. (duh)
bob,
You reinforce my point below that our legal system is not only extremely complex: it is unnecessarily complex.
Every police officer should know the very basics:
(a) There is no crime if there is no victim.
(b) If there is no crime, police have no authority whatsoever to do anything.
(c) All efforts of police, attorneys, and judges should be the pursuit of JUSTICE, not the pursuit of tens of thousands of pages of legal codes that legislatures and executive branches dictate by fiat.
(d) Everyone is innocent until a jury of their peers finds them guilty IN A FAIR TRIAL.
(e) Police must respect our rights to privacy, to own property, to travel, to not travel, to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures, and our absolute right to self-defense and life using any and all techniques and objects available to that end. Thus the ends cannot justify the means if the means includes violating our rights, period.
Sadly, many/most police do not know that simple list above, much less practice it.
That is where a major breakdown is.
Yes, and it does vary wildly from town to town.
Where I am our State police I feel couldn’t be better, depending which side of authority you’re on, but that’s another issue.
I find myself far too many times explaining to people their just guys doing their job.
Then why don’t YOU become a police officer and show us all how it SHOULD be done? Put up or shut up.
Put up or shut up is never an appropriate answer, justification, or retaliation.
It’s many politicians jobs to destroy the second amendment. Put up or shut up, right? Just because someone has a job doesn’t mean whatever they do in completion of their occupational duties is justified. Even more so with jobs that effect individual rights. Police officers in particular need to be knowledgeable because if they make a misjudgement it could cost rights, taxes, time, stress, and lives.
Have a little respect and logic and don’t degrade someone else’s or your own intelligence. It makes you look like a fool and as a result, all of us a fool.
Well, I’m shocked. Different opinions from two people and neither knows anything about the Constitution. And, if one is a Cop they will, of course, side with the opinion that is most closely aligned with oppressing everyone. After all “they” are all dumb and hate everyone. Who is writing this crap for this bog lately? Where has the Truth About Guns gone?
Do you have anything constructive to add?
You obviously don’t.
As if a post that garners nearly 100 responses is not constructive.
Skip it and go to a pocket dump article.
You know…because human rights are so passé.
Beer snobs don’t chose Sweetwater lol.
Had to pick something he had heard of and that he could pick up at the grocery store.
I’m a beer snob to him because he didn’t think I would like his Corona.
Currently working on a growler of New Realm Kikimora
Founders Backwoods Bastard.
Haven’t had that. Keep my eyes peeled. I like Founders.
Dogfish Head Burton Baton
I have a hard time considering anyone a “snob” who drinks IPAs.
I didn’t say I was a snob. Its just that all the Bud Light consumers consider me one.
IPAs are my “food beers”. I like Porters and stouts. Besides, not all IPAs are created equal. I’m partial to the double or Imperial IPAs.
Bells Oracle is liquid bliss.
The beer choices that America has are by and large sad. Go to any bar and you’ll be lucky to find any porter or stout outside of Guinness. Rather, your options will be a couple dozen IPAs which all taste like piss water cause the USA is for some reason obsessed with hops.
If I was stranded on a deserted island and could only have one brand of beer for the rest of my life, that beer would be Samuel Smith Oatmeal Stout.
I don’t know what part of the country you live in but here on Long Island there is so much choice everywhere. I used to make my own, but there are so many craft breweries just here on the island that it’s not worth the effort.
And as for not knowing the Constitution, sadly our education system considers that not to be a priority.
I read an article where the author said, if the 2nd was so important it would have been in the body. That is ignorance and unfortunately not uncommon.
Their 420 IPA is one of the few IPAs I like. All the IPA flavor and juicy citrus WITHOUT the pervasive and lingering aftertaste of licking soap.
I don’t know what they’ve done to achieve that, but they keep me as a repeat customer every summer because of it.
420 is not an IPA. It is Sweetwater’s staple beer, a pale ale.
The core problem has three primary elements:
(1) What the U.S. and state Constitutions say and mean.
(2) What everyone knows is actually right and wrong.
(3) The actual legal system in practice.
By and large, what the U.S. and state Constitutions say and mean are consistent with what everyone knows to be right and wrong. The real problem is the actual legal system in practice, which:
(1) often sanctions what everyone knows to be right, and
(2) often fails to sanction what everyone knows to be wrong.
In other words our actual legal system in practice is frequently unjust and heavily skewed to benefit the ruling class. Of course, in order to do this, attorneys and judges have turned the legal system into an unnecessarily convoluted thing that only they can afford to navigate.
Nailed it.
Did the host check his home for missing items? After all he did have an invited police officer in his residence, things seem to come up missing after they’ve left.
Ha. You think cops are bad at the constitution you should try congress on for size.
You think congress is bad, check out all the 5-4 decisions in the Supreme Court.
I nominate “Michael in GA” for tomorrows “Irresponsible Gun Owner” Blog post.
I’ve seen the anlogy of drinking and driving compared to drinking and carrying. It is flawed. First of all, driving is the opperation of a motor vehicle. Carrying a gun is just that. Keep it on you and don’t fuck with it. I don’t fuck with it when I don’t drink so I don’t fuck with it when I do.
Now if I was to “get hammered” before competing in a three gun competition or instruct someone on the shooting range, then you can call me irresponsible.
But just carrying a gun so I can stay prepared to defend myself even when I drink is not irresponsible in the least.
If you can’t behave yourself after a couple beers, well that;s on you. Don’t project your problems on me.
Alcohol doesn’t impair judment, it impairs restraint. If you are prone to fighting when sober, you are more likely to fight a bigger opponent or several opponents when drunk. If you are a sexual predator, you are more likely, when toasted, to get handsy with the ladies and get beat down by her boyfriend.
If you respect your weapon and have no trace of irresponsible tendencies with it when sober, you won’t act any different towards it after drinking.
Drinking doesn’t make you do stupid stuff. Drinking hinders your ability to control yourself.
There’s no idiot here to be controlled. Your case may be different.
I’m not terribly surprised. A friend of mine has a husband who went to the police academy and was horrified by what they were teaching.
What he told me would be pages long so I won’t post it but suffice to say it was more focused on the physical aspects of policing and on paperwork rather than the actual law.
And those ‘physical aspects’ were “command and control”.
Been going on (widespread) for 30+ years. Only gets worse…
I know I’m in the stark minority here, but I think Michael from Georgia and the deputy are both off target. The Bill of Rights doesn’t apply to the states. (Most of) the Framers were right and Hugo Black (who was an ex-Klansmen and progressive) was dead wrong
What part of in-al-ien-a-ble do you not understand?
As I understand it, the SUPERAMENDMENT, (14TH) is grossly overpowered and not used as originally intended, leading to ridiculous interpretations leading to anchor babies and other insanity. As are the ‘Clauses’.
The Constitution and Amendments prohibit the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT from infringement, and apply to the federal Govt. For Its’ responsibilities. STATE Constitutions usually mirror the federal government, but not always, leaving states to pass law in accordance with their STATE constitution.
In my neck of the woods, we only drink,( rip roaring, fall down, stumbling drunk) and shoot firearms on private property. We put the gunz up after someone gets shot. That always seems to put a damper on the party
Not only do I have a gun when I drink. I have a…
chainsaw
Ford F-150
swimming pool with a diving board
gas stove
18′ step ladder
prescription drugs
The most dangerous thing to be around when you drink alcohol is…
more alcohol.
Know your limits.
The constitution limits the power of the state and their employees. It’s not breaking news to declare that most cops dislike the constitution when it comes to restricting them from wielding unlimited power over the citizens of this country.
Government is a necessary evil. In no way should we be honoring or respecting those that think they are above the law because they have a state issued uniform or because their job is so “dangerous”. Garbage collectors are three times as likely to die on the job than police patrol officers. Doesn’t mean we need to lick their boots on a daily basis or give them extra privileges to make their job “safer”.
Yeah. I am not anti cop to a man. The problem is that not enough people want to take personal responsibility. Society asks too much of the police and that’s what they give us.
It’s shit like this that pisses me off!
https://youtu.be/Z0AIWvhauIo
Most cops are doing a job and hopefully know the ‘rules’ (i.e. what they can and cannot do according to caselaw). Knowing the underpinnings of caselaw is nice but just not necessary for day to day experience. Certainly the 4th Amendment, by far, is the one that cops have to know the most about.
Teach judges, politicians and voters about the Constitution because that’s what will change things.
So, in conclusion, Michael in GA, do what you want. Good luck and God Bless. When you get caught, don’t cry. Your poor choices could impact others. Wife. Children. Parents. Friends. Most of us like the freedom ,security , and sport that guns provide. I also like beer. However, outside of your own domicile, (and inside) there are legal, logical and moral implications for impaired gun use. I hope we never need our arms. Stay safe brother. And think about it.
When I get caught doing what?
Lucky you. You actually found a cop who ever heard of the Bill of Rights, well at least some of it. Where I live I don’t think any of them were informed the that constitution was ratified, much less the Bill of Rights or any other amendments.