01.24
As you all know I don’t usually talk to cops. After reading all the interdepartmental emails and memo’s and finding that these Chiefs of Police and Sheriff’s have been feeding their subordinates mis-information, I decided to talk to these officers. There were 3, 2 from Santa Clara Sheriff’s Dept. and one from San Jose PD (pay close attention San Jose PD). Based on the first officer’s demeanor, calm, friendly, no gun drawn, I chose to talk to him. Also it was raining, which demonstrates their dedication to the job and mine to carrying every day no-mater-what.
Transcript of crappy audio: <—— Click here for audio.
Deputy: You know why we’re here.
Me: Yeah I know why you’re here.
Deputy: Just wanna check to see you’re in compliance.
Me: Sure. Sure. Do you really wanna do that standing on the road?
Deputy: Yeah sure that’s fine.
Me: You want to be handling the weapon? You don’t mind. Alright. Just to put it on record I don’t consent to any searches of my person or my property.
Deputy: Oh that’s fine, that’s fine. (Steps behind me and draws my gun from its holster.)
Me: Including the serial number of that weapon.
Deputy: Alright, I don’t plan on doing that I’m just want to make sure you’re in compliance.
Me: (Looking at the San Jose PD, maybe Sunnyvale, I don’t remember. I’ll discuss my mistakes at the end) How you doin?
Officer1: Doing good.
Deputy: <inaudible> (Maybe “golden”? At this point he’s returned my sidearm to its holster and steps back)
Me: Great.
Deputy: You are free to go.
Me: Did you guys get called out here?
Deputy: Yeah we had a couple calls.
Me: A couple?! (I UOC everyday in my neighborhood, and walk this path at least once a week so I wash shocked) Interesting.
Deputy: <inaudible> (something to the effect “you think you’d expect that” if memory serves)
Deputy: Like I said you’re free to go but I got a couple questions for you?
### Click HERE for the rest of this conversation ####
Me: Sure I don’t mind talking to you guys.
Deputy: Just out of curiosity, I mean yeah it’s your legal right to carry it and all that. Isn’t that kind of, I guess not around here but isn’t that kind of asking for trouble since you don’t have ammunition in it? Because me personally I wouldn’t want to carry an unloaded gun, it’s more like a paper weight, you know what I’m saying?
Me: Sure, that be silly. I carry ammo on my person, so I can load it. I can do that in about 2 seconds. I rather be able to load it in 2 seconds than be standing there with my dick in my hand if something goes down.
Deputy: I hear you on that. I hear you on that. OK.
Me: Until we can get the law changed or Sheriff Smith wants to issue the CCW I requested, this is what I’m gonna be doing.
Deputy: That would be an act of god.
Me: Well
Deputy: You know what I’m saying.
Me: No. I know, I got a lot of trouble just trying to apply for it. People giving me a hard time down at the station, people snickering “why are you even applying”. You know that kind of stuff, But I wanted to be able to say on record “I got denied for a CCW and now this is my only option”
Deputy: Yeah but one thing you have to understand. To obtain a CCW is very hard. Because typically you have to transport large suns of money, large sums of cash or <asks other deputy> what’s the other one they issue them for? It’s usually like a Pharmacist.
Me: Oh yeah, yeah, also being famous and also contributing at least $25,000 to Laurie Smith’s re-election campaign.
Deputy: That I don’t know about. <but thought it was true enough to be funny>
Me: Yes. There are a number of things that will get you a CCW, I understand that. I’m just not in a position to contribute 25 thousand to her re-election campaign.
Deputy: You and me both buddy, I can understand that.
Me: Until then this is how it’s gonna have to be. I think I had good cause above and beyond being able to protect myself. But she’s got her policies and it it what it is.
Deputy: Now may I ask you this? Do you have a job?
Me: I’m employed.
Deputy: Unemployed?
Me: I’m employed, I’m gainfully employed, yes.
Deputy: Do you carry that at work or just while you’re on the streets. (I’m confident he’s been informed of where I work and this is an attempt to get me to incriminate myself, ONE of the paths to work goes through a GFSZ.)
Me: My work, without going into detail, because the last time I talk to one of your sheriffs deputies they decided to use the information I was willfully giving up to them in a consensual conversation like we’re having, they tried to use that against me to obtain a warrant. So I’m always cautious of what I tell people.
Deputy: No me man, I’m just curious.
Me: So me particular employer has a no guns at work policy. So because I honor property rights, I respect that, you know what I mean?
Deputy: Yeah
Me: If they said no pink shoes, I’d also respect that.
Deputy: I can understand that.
Me: So in my particular case If I want to go to the range for shooting practice or I want to go out in public while armed, I have to go home, get it and then go back out. Kind of a pain.
Deputy: Alrighty
Me: Just carrying for my own personal protection.
Deputy: I understand that, that’s your god given right.
Me: California would think different.
Deputy: Well you’re in compliance with the laws.
Me: That’s true as far as state law goes. We’re waiting for a federal ruling <inaudible/mumbling>
Deputy: Well now let me ask you this. Now again like I said you can split anytime. It’s just curiosity.
Me: Sure. Usually I do. If you talk to other deputies, as soon as I’m done with me (e) check I’m out. But I think I’m more into the educational phase. I’ve read some of the things you’ve said in your interdepartmental emails and things and…
Deputy: Ok first off, when you say you guys, I’ve never contacted you before or any thing like that before. (He’s right, I apologize)
Me: I’m generalizing. I’m saying the Sheriffs Dept. and Sunnyvale PD. I understand that there’s this contention and things that you’ve been told in your briefings, that we’re all a bunch of sue happy people that are looking to entrap you guys and litigate. One that hasn’t happened to date, there hasn’t been a single piece of legal action against you guys.
Deputy: Well as long as we’re doing what we’re supposed to.
Me: Right I don’t think it’s a problem as long as you guys aren’t trampling on other people’s rights.
Deputy: Our question is, aren’t you concerned about the laws becoming…
Me: Worse?
Deputy: No, just more lenient and the guns falling into the hands of the wrong individuals? Obviously it’d become more beneficial for you because you should be able to carry what you want.
Me: Right. I think guns are already in the hands of criminal and people that are planning on doing harm, they have no problem getting weapons. <Deputy nods in agreement.>
Deputy: OK.
Me: So I don’t think making laws more lenient would mean that people would have them fall into the wrong hands. Another thing to bring up would be, let’s say somebody was a hardened criminal, felon, that kind of stuff was also open carrying and walking around. If he exerted his rights and was not committing a crime, wasn’t about to commit a crime, you guys didn’t have reasonable suspicion to think so, he’d be walking away just like I’m about to. So I’m almost OK with that. What I want Law Enforcement to do is go after people that are committing crimes or are about to commit a crime. When you guys start trying to get into… <Deputy tries to interrupt> No. When you guys try and start trying to depict people’s “intent”. I hear that a lot, “We don’t know your intent”.
Deputy: I was just about to say…
Me: Well yeah you guys have been brainwashed. I understand that. So the reason you can’t deal with people’s “intent”, that’s called a thought crime. Alright? You can go after people for what they think or are about to think and do. Right? So when you start encroaching on thought crimes you guys should really take a step back and say “Why don’t we go after people that have committed a crime or we have reasonable suspicion are about to commit a crime. Let’s not try and get in their heads and learn what they’re gonna do.
Deputy: Well I hear you on that. Our hands are tied to a certain degree though. You can understand.
Me: right and they’re supposed to be, because you guys are citizens. You don’t have extra rights. You guys are normal people just like you and I. The only difference is the entire “State”, I put quotation marks around “State” because it’s an imaginary thing like the “the Tooth Fairy” or “Santa Clause” it doesn’t exist. The “State” has endowed you with certain authority, like carrying a gun in public, loaded in that case. They haven’t made any laws that would restrict you guys from carrying guns. You also have this, not really written in law but sort of this general idea that if your a cop you can carry concealed without a permit, which is complete B.S., but nobody’s going to bust another cop on it right? So that’s the kind of double standards that citizens start to kind of dislike. They’re often not reminded that you guys are just citizens like we are. You guys just have a job where you’re wearing a costume, you have a shiny badge and a cool car, <deputy laughs> so you guys get away with a little bit more.
Deputy: Alrighty dude.
Me: Alright, I’ve enjoyed talking to you guys. You take it easy.
Deputy: Have a good day.
Me: Alright you too.
Deputy: Keep dry, or try to anyways. <it was raining>
Me: I will.
Now the mistake I made was not getting their names or departments. This would have been useful had the situation gone different. Or if I just wanted to review which cops take what position on the issue of self protection.
Hope you enjoyed. For more, bookmark this page or subscribe to my podcast.
Great work, badace. You held your ground and dulled out some education and a point-of-view from someone in your situation. I would assume that the majority of on the beat officers feel the same way as the ones you encountered (and usually encounter). They want to do the check as that is their job, to check for violations, I don’t blame them for that; but they seem a bit out of tune with the political agenda of their high-ranking commanders, elected and appointed and of policy/law-makers.
There does seem to be a prevailing attitude from LEO’s that the fewer non-police with guns, the easier it is to do their jobs and I can somewhat understand that position, if they arrived on seen with two people with guns, one protecting him/her-self from the other, they have less work to do to disarm them and there is a less likely chance of an innocent person being shot; however, that just does not work with the general public, where police typically are not around. Sure, some places they can get there in mere minutes, sometimes you luck out and they’re already there, and some places unfortunately it may take 15 minutes or more to get somewhere, but most of the time, they aren’t there and encounters with violent criminals usually take just seconds to go down.
I am curious about the couple of calls received, though.
Anyway, ok, so you didn’t get their information, you’ll just have to eat that one, but lets hope they take what they heard from you and spread it around.
Good work.
Terrell
North Carolina
Thanks Terell, I love to get your take on things.
I have access to an archive of Police Scanner audio. I checked the Sheriff’s archive for the 30 mins before and after my detainment and found no calls from dispatch to these officers.
I think it was a bluff. If they had said, “no we just saw you as we passed” I don’t think it would change things. To my knowledge I’ve never had a person call in an MWAG call on me. All of my encounters have been the result of crossing paths with LEA. Or when they read my posts on public forums about meeting other open carriers and they just so happen to be there at the same time.
I can tell you from experience – the Foster City PD are the worst. A few years back, I was pulled over for making a right turn on a GREEN light. While illegally going through my wallet, the nice officer came across my id card for the indoor shooting range in Santa Clara – instant Gesatapo! Accused me of being a militia member and having “bombs, grenades & bazookas” hidden not only in my car, but stashed all over the country! Thoroughly searched my car – finding nothing of interest, and finally after hassling me for an hour, decided I wasn’t there to overthrow the city (still got a ticket for making a legal turn though – which I did beat in court, but what a pain!). All that for just having an id card to a shooting range!? Don’t even want to think about what they would’ve done had I been on my way back from the range and there were firearms in the car (and would have been in a locked case in the trunk like they’re supposed to be)…
This was good, but maybe the deputy was trying to interuppt you to inform you that convicted “felons” lose their right to possess firearms, as well as other rights upon conviction of a felony.
Yeah, cops are brainwashed. If you weren’t such jackasses you’d realize most agree with your right to carry, but you’re to busy with your own “thought crime” against you deciding what they believe and don’t believe because they have on clothing that respresents laws they didn’t make, but are obligated to enforce.
When you folks want to be taken seriously, have a conversation and stop assigning your paranoia to every one you’ve chosen to stereotype. After all, isn’t part of your complaint about how you’re being stereotyped? You’re just slightly on the hypocritical side of the line.
SOSO,
Officer’s are NOT obligated to enforce this ordinance (PC 12031). Do some reading and learn a bit of history and then come back. The only retraction I have for this encounter is that I was wrong about them not having a written law permitting them to Conceal Carry, please see Law Enforcement Safety Act