Two Recent 2nd and 4th Amendment Rulings

[Iraqgunz]

Recently two different courts have ruled that the mere possession or carrying of a firearm is not sufficient grounds for officers to conduct a search or demand proof of a license to carry. One of them is from the Indiana Supreme Court and the other comes from the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Indiana Case- https://publicaccess.courts.in.gov/docket/Search/Detail?casenumber=49S02-1611-CR-00610

8th Circuit Case- http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/16/08/152431P.pdf

In addition to the 8th Circuit finding for the plaintiff, the City of Lincoln donated $160K to his retirement fund for injuries sustained during the stop and arrest.

[Eurodriver]

The driver, later identified as Duffie, is a double amputee with two prosthetic
legs. He could not safely exit the vehicle in the manner that the officers commanded.
The fall caused one of Duffie's prostheses to become detached. Duffie's prosthetic legs
were ill-fitting due to weight loss from cancer treatments. Duffie remained on the
ground for the remainder of the traffic stop. After finding no one else in the van, the
officers handcuffed Duffie, still face down on the pavement, searched him for a
weapon, and then removed the handcuffs after five to ten minutes at Duffie's request.
The officers told Duffie that they stopped him because his vehicle matched the
description of the van from the incident at the convenience store. By this point, the
officers knew that Duffie did not match the description of the young man at the
convenience store. Duffie was not a young man in a tank top with braids; at the time,
he was a bald, 58 year-old double-amputee.

The officers resumed searching Duffie's van. Duffie claims that the officers
began this second search without his consent and that he later consented only because
he believed that the officers had already searched his van. In searching Duffie's van,
the officers found a silver handgun-style paintball gun with a black grip. Duffie
explained that the paintball gun belonged to his son. Officer Kaiser seized the
paintball gun in order to follow-up with Duffie's son regarding the convenience-store
incident. The officers then released Duffie. Although Duffie did not report any injuries
to the officers during the traffic stop, he later claimed that he lost two teeth and tore
his rotator cuff as a result of the traffic stop

That's crazy af.

[TaterTot]

That's crazy af.
For every 50 good cops there's a turd or 2 with a complex

[SteyrAUG]

I can understand the original stop, but when it starts to become obvious it's not the same guy, you need to ease down. Otherwise you end up costing your department hard earned tax dollars when you handle a 58 year old guy with prognostics like a "perp." That is all money that could otherwise go to useful training that saves officer lives.

I've never completely understood how anyone could get through the academy without figuring that one out.

[Moose-Knuckle]

Recently two different courts have ruled that the mere possession or carrying of a firearm is not sufficient grounds for officers to conduct a search or demand proof of a license to carry. One of them is from the Indiana Supreme Court and the other comes from the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Indiana Case- https://publicaccess.courts.in.gov/docket/Search/Detail?casenumber=49S02-1611-CR-00610

8th Circuit Case- http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/16/08/152431P.pdf

In addition to the 8th Circuit finding for the plaintiff, the City of Lincoln donated $160K to his retirement fund for injuries sustained during the stop and arrest.


And I'm still not tired of all this winning.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

The Nebraska one is , Duh.

The Indiana case showed some judicial back bone. Not a very sympathetic defendant. You let a felon, who lied to the cops get off. That was not going to be popular. Glad it went that way and I hope that spreads. "Man with a gun" has to become less of a problem versus man threatening or shooting people. With the number of CCWs out there, just because someone has a gun doesn't mean that something is wrong. Look at the number of nip slips and crotch shots there are- people expose stuff they don't mean to all the time. Plus, having an SUV, just because I get pulled over and the cop sees gun bags, I don't want him fishing around looking at dates on mags.

[Moose-Knuckle]

Look at the number of nip slips and crotch shots there are- people expose stuff they don't mean to all the time. Plus, having an SUV, just because I get pulled over and the cop sees gun bags, I don't want him fishing around looking at dates on mags.

Another good reason for those discreet cases, guitar/violin cases, or even Wilson tennis racket cases (SBR/side folder AKs, etc.)

Question for you, now that the new CO law on standard capacity mags has been a thing, how exactly do they check dates on mags?

I was wondering if new mags after the ban went into effect have to have the date stamped on them or something.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Another good reason for those discreet cases, guitar/violin cases, or even Wilson tennis racket cases (SBR/side folder AKs, etc.)

Question for you, now that the new CO law on standard capacity mags has been a thing, how exactly do they check dates on mags?

I was wondering if new mags after the ban went into effect have to have the date stamped on them or something.

Best way to travel is a soft side golf bag carrier with wheels. Ammo on in the bottom, 2-3 long gun bags' and no questions in and out of hotels.

I'm sure a Magpul guy can explain it better. CO law is all new mags made here have to have a date on them. Stuff made out state, I guess not affected, since there is no fed rule as far as I know. STI mags don't have a single mark on them. Local gun store has a bin of 'kits' of all the parts for a 30rnd mag.

As far as I know, there has been one guy convicted on the mag thing as the only charge, but I forgot the details. Stupid stuff.

[26 Inf]

And I'm still not tired of all this winning.

I get what you mean, but none of those cases should have made it to the appellate stage.

Both just applied fairly straightforward interpretations that the lower courts should have applied.

Nothing earth shaking at all.

[Flankenstein]

Another good reason for those discreet cases, guitar/violin cases, or even Wilson tennis racket cases (SBR/side folder AKs, etc.)

Question for you, now that the new CO law on standard capacity mags has been a thing, how exactly do they check dates on mags?

I was wondering if new mags after the ban went into effect have to have the date stamped on them or something.

Nobody in CO gives a shit. Rah rah "come and take it" forum members from other states are the only people that care. Many out of state retailers also care as the city of San Fran sued a bunch of them awhile back and scared everyone else. Legally, shipping magazines into CO is 100% legal.

The couple people that have been charged all had a litany of other charges so no brainer for DA to tack on whatever else they could.

[Moose-Knuckle]

Nobody in CO gives a shit. Rah rah "come and take it" forum members from other states are the only people that care. Many out of state retailers also care as the city of San Fran sued a bunch of them awhile back and scared everyone else. Legally, shipping magazines into CO is 100% legal.

The couple people that have been charged all had a litany of other charges so no brainer for DA to tack on whatever else they could.

Oh I figured as much.

Kind of like how does a DA prove a pre-ban/post-ban mag is actually manufactured prior to xyz ban. It's not like manufacturers are stamping out CO only mags with a MIL/LEO stamp like we saw during the AWB.

Then you have the vast majority of Sheriffs that have stated they will not enforce such bovine feces. And I'm sure the big city PD have better things to keep them busy.