Good Advice

[user]

I don't know this guy, but I agree whole-heartedly with everything he said.
I've been retired now for five years or so, so I'm no longer in a position to give legal advice, but I suggest that "letter to police" I sent around a while back in pdf format is also a good thing to have handy.

 

[Doug_Nightmare]

Please link it again. I sought it but to no avail. Thanks.

 

[DoubleTap]

Wow, User, it is so good to see your post here! I'm looking forward to watching the video. Hope you are doing well.

 

[user]

plain text url: ht tps: // www. youtube. com / watch? v = ZNUw2G9WWOk
remove the spaces - this system insists on converting the url to bbcode.

Thanks, yup, still vertical in spite of everything. Had a bit of a go with the autoimmune crap, gradually changing the drugs, much better, now, thanks. I'll have to make the trip to Retchm'n for breakfast one of these days. I wonder whether River City is still any good.

 

[color of law]

Please link it again. I sought it but to no avail. Thanks.

I believe this is the letter User is referring to.

Letter to LEO's

Here's the text of the letter I wrote, referenced in a recent thread. Feel free to copy & paste into your word processor, reformat, and print. Just a suggestion, keep a copy in the car with your registration certificate. Make sure you've got the name and phone number of an attorney whom you...

forum.opencarry.org

To Law Enforcement Officers:

I have been instructed by my attorney not to discuss the facts of any case with anyone other than my attorney unless and until I am given the opportunity to consult with and be advised by my attorney, and to have my attorney present for any statement to be given or interrogation to be conducted: I shall not answer any questions other than for identification. This applies regardless of the nature or duration of the detention or arrest. I do not wish to evade or interfere with any legitimate investigation, nor does my refusal to answer represent any disrespect for you or your office.

My attorney has also instructed me never to consent to a warrantless search of my person or property, and has instructed me to tell you that there will be absolutely no waiver of the right to see and be served with a warrant in proper form prior to any such search.

My attorney has warned me, and I understand that, you may determine that this is a situation in which you feel you need to make an arrest; I understand that you may make such an arrest regardless of anything I may tell you. I have further been instructed to submit to your authority fully in the event you do elect to make an arrest. My submission, however, is for the purpose of avoiding unnecessary confrontation, and is neither a waiver of, or done with prejudice to, my rights under applicable civil and criminal laws.

I am represented by the attorney named below, and that am the client of this attorney for all issues related to the detention, search and seizure of me and my property. I ask that you contact my attorney promptly upon taking me into custody, before any search of my property, and before making any attempt to question me about the facts of any case. Unless you feel you have probable cause to place me into custody at this time, I respectfully request that you advise me that I am free to leave right now.

My name is: ______________________________________________________

I reside at: ________________________________________________________

My attorney’s name is: ______________________________________________

My Attorney’s telephone number is: ___________________________________

 

[DoubleTap]

So glad you are doing better, User. It would be great to see you, let me know and I'm sure we can find a good spot for breakfast. Sadly, River City Diner closed down sometime ago. Sure miss those Saturday gatherings with the group.

 

[color of law]

This "Hampton Law" You tube site really does not explain your actual rights., especially concerning a Terry stop. Terry v. Ohio simply says that the officer has to believe that you are "armed AND dangerous" to pat you down for weapons. Now that the SC has said in Bruen that possessing arms in public is not a crime, searching for weapons is not a prerequisite to a search. Terry is in jeopardy.

Searching your motor vehicle for weapons without a warrant is not an option anymore. Why?

The Fourth Amendment says: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (Emphasis added)

A motor vehicle is an “effect”; private property. See Wooley v. Maynard, 430 U.S. 705 (1977) and Walker v. Tex. Div., Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc., 576 U.S. ___ (2015) citing Wooley. Also see United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012).

Yes, there is a warrantless exception in regards to motor vehicles. The Supreme Court first made warrantless exception in Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925) (“Search without a warrant of an automobile, and seizure therein of liquor subject to seizure and destruction under the Prohibition Act, do not violate the Amendment, if made upon probable cause, i.e., upon a belief, reasonably arising out of circumstances known to the officer, that the vehicle contains such contraband liquor.”) (Emphasis added)

Heller, McDonald and Bruen makes it clear that the bearing of arms is a Constitutional protected right and, as such, the carrying of Arms openly or concealed cannot be classified as contraband.

And Heller and Bruen makes clear that to wear, bear, or carry them upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose of use, or for the purpose of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in case of a conflict with another person would apply to motor vehicles.

So, being in possession of a weapons (armed) is not a prerequisite to a search nor a prerequisite of being dangerous.