Update on the Philly OC case - radio interview with the chief

[hogdogs]

Here's a hint: Drawn weapons are still Level 1, Officer presence. Unless the officer shoots you (Deadly Force, Level 6), he/she is still acting under Level 1. Get over it.

To us citizens.... Level one would be a calm contact. No weapons drawn and hands out of the pockets. Gun drawn, names being called cuss words thrown around while gun is aimed at center mass.... well I won't put a number on that level but it is only one digit under hot lead in the squishy torso of a citizen... in this case a law abiding citizen carrying a gun openly to avoid being accosted by armed thugs committing criminal acts against him in the city of brotherly love!!!

So what did he get for his efforts? He got accosted by an armed thug committing a very heinous crime!!!

Brent

[hogdogs]

Let me quantify my previous remark...

If any responsible, legal gun carrying (open or concealed) civilian citizen feels the need to draw... and draw and curse.... and draw, curse and maintain muzzle pointed to CoM... He has likely decided that not only is he in fear of death or at least "GBH" but he is within' his legal rights to use lethal force to mitigate this threat.

The only thing that should prevent him from lettin' a round go downrange would be the fact that the bad guy/s immediately cease and desist the behavior that threatens the citizen.

The responsible gun carrier would never pull a gun to scare someone! He would never pull the weapon to intimidate nor to impose his "POWER" over the bad guy.

So with the above... What did the civilian in the sworn officer employment position have done to him, by the legal self defense firearm carrier, to warrant this behavior?

And you know you have the right to make a citizen arrest! In many areas you can use any force up to and including lethal force to hold a "violent felon" at bay or to stop a "violent felony crime" from going further.

So should citizens start helpin' out the cops buy stopping armed citizens to make sure their "papers" are "in order"?

This officer... and the chief are no more sane or aware of proper protocol regarding legal acts or civil rights than that long hair hippy, TIMOTHY, who intends to mow down OC'ers with his vehicle...


Brent

[hogdogs]

One more issue to ponder.... Conservation officers!!!

I have had contact on numerous occasions afield. Each and everytime I was armed... Armed with no smaller than a .410 with 28 inch barrel. Several times I carried larger bore shotguns of 20 and 12 gauge. Rifles included .22lr, .30-30 and .30-06. Every time I can recollect I had this lethal wepon in my hands at time of contact. I also cannot remember one time it didn't have a full or near full capacity and I also cannot remember one time it didn't have a round chambered.

And of all these contacts... NEVER ONCE did the officer draw his .38/.357 revolver (dating myself a bit) or .40cal plastic pistol on me!

Does this mean that our uniformed beat cops are cowardly? Or does it mean the conservation officers had brass spheres?

Brent

[Glenn Dee]

Aguilla Blanca

OK... sir... dont you think you may have been a bit harsh on JGCoastie?

Most of the people here have never worked as a police officer, or sworn an oath as a police officer. Let me dispel any delusions about officer safety. No where in any oath of office for any police officer is there a rule, suggestion, requirement that he sacrifce himself. Keeping in mind that the police are also civilians, and are also protected by the same constitution as everyone else.

I think we all agree that profiling in and of itself is bad. Were asking some of us (the police) to live by the strictest letter of law as interpeted by us the individual citizen. Thats not realistic. And it's not going to happen. City attorney's department legal bureaus, trial lawyers, and judges interpet the law, and decisions. The police follow the interpetation of the lawyers responsible to their jurisdiction.

As JGCoasty said... at the end of the day I'm going home to my family. Now I can acomplish this in two ways. I can be a police officer who does nothing, maybe working in an office, or on patrol shirking work and not responding to calls, letting other officers do the heavy lifting.
Or I can make my personal safety my highest priority. How I do that in my opinion is the rub. Again it's about tactics. Anyone who read my prior posts should get that I dont condone, or accept the actions of the Philly police in this incedent. I personally believe the police created a much more dangerous and volitile situation than ever existed before their actions. The civilian in no way deserved to be treated with that level of violence, and suspicion.

There are concepts in police work the average citizen may not understand. One such concept is "PATROL". Patrol is not the police hanging around waiting for a call so they can do something. Patrol is the basis of all police work. Patrol can be thought of as preventive maintenance in society. The goal of police on patrol is to PREVENT crime. And to DETECT crime as it happens. If a police Officer see something out of place he may investigate it. A broken window that wasnt broken his last time around, an open door of a home that was never left open before, a man openly carrying a firearm where he never saw one before. None of these things in and of themselves are a crime... but all require some further investigation.

My concern is how this inquiery, investigation is conducted. Does the officer poke his head through the broken window and get decapitated by a falling piece of glass?.. or does he try the door of the business?... Does the Officer call in a swat team and dogs to search the home with an open door? or could he stop and observe that the homeowner is putting groceries away, and inadvertently left the door open. The same with the open carrier. The officer may well have made a friend and supporter if he had used reasonable tactics.

Glenn Dee

[Glenn Dee]

Aguilla Blanca

As far as racial profiling. Look at the absurdity conducted on a daily basis by TSA. Searching a 70 year old white lady from Nebraska, while ignoring a 29 year old in a full hajib, while trying to prevent a muslim extremist from hijacking or blowing up an airliner.

Stopping people based only on their race/religion/gender/sexual proclivity is and should be illegal. But couple that with one other factor, and an officer is doing his job. I'll illustrate with two examples... The first one While on patrol in Harlem NY, and away fo the tourist area of 125 st we sometimes would find white kids, and sometimes some older white folks who seem to be aimlessly driving around. I'd usually stop them. Did I stop them based on their race? You bet I did. During one of the blackouts I was detailed to a more gentile area thats 99% white yuppies. We spot a car with three black's and one hispanic seemingly driving around with no destination in the area. I stopped them. Was it based on their race?... yes it was.

My point is race can be the major factor in zeroing in on a person for a closer look, when there are others possibly minor factors.

If a description is broadcast of a 6'2" male black who just snatched a purse at the 176 st subway station... I'm not going to start stopping 5'3" white guys. However a swarthy, or well tanned 6'2" white guy might make me go hmmmm!

[NJgunowner]

I'll sum this up real fast.

It's legal to open carry in PA, and therefore Philly.

Walking down the street or into a store is NOT suspicious activity.

Since open carry is legal, that is not suspicious activity.

Having ANYONE pull a gun on you for no reason IS illegal.

Any cop who breaks the law in such a manner should be prosecuted the same as any citizen. Wearing a badge does not or should not exempt you from the law.

Would I have complied with the officer, yes. But not because he was an officer, but because the MORON was pointing a gun at me! Then I'd have sued his butt of later.

Frankly if the officer had been shot and I ended up on the jury, I'd have sided with the defendant. He broke no law, he was doing nothing wrong, and having a gun pointed at you for no reason would constitute self defense cop or no cop. The idiot could have killed him with the twitch of a finger.

There can NOT be one law/rule for regular citizens and a completely different set for cops.

[Southern Rebel]

If you are a law-abiding citizen, and a uniformed officer of the law approaches you with a drawn weapon, whether at low-ready or aimed at your head, best course of action is to comply. That's the way you're least likely to incur extra holes.

If I am a law-abiding citizen and constantly having this gun-pointing situation arise, there will come a time when I grow greatly concerned that your "uniformed officer" is gonna be like the one famous for demonstrating his prowess with safely carrying a Glock and ends up shooting himself or me! At that point, I am not sure how I would react to another "uniformed officer" wanting to point his Glock aimed at my head.

As a lawful CC licensed individual, I am not allowed to point my SIG everytime I feel that an individual on the street "might" be a threat to me, my license would be revoked and my butt would likely be seeing potential jail time. I expect the same rules to apply to uniformed officers.

If I were poor and lived in a neighborhood rampant with crackhouses, would that give the police the right to burst in my house (with no warrant or articulable reason) and point their guns at the head of every individual in my house - just because my house resembles all the other houses in my neighborhood???

Me-thinks Joseph Stalin would have been proud of Philadelphia's fine police department and how they interpret the law and the constitution.

[Musketeer]

Here's a hint: Drawn weapons are still Level 1, Officer presence. Unless the officer shoots you (Deadly Force, Level 6), he/she is still acting under Level 1. Get over it.

The difference from level 1 to level 6 is less than an inch of finger travel and 10# of force on the trigger... Sorry, the levels need to be rewritten. Pointing a weapon at someone is the overt threat of deadly force. Those simple four rules of gun handling tell you NOT to point the weapon at anything you are not prepared to destroy. If you think level 1 justifies placing an innocent subject in grave physical danger then the levels are wrong and need to be rewritten. There are enough cases of idiots (both LEOs and not) having negligent discharges to cause me to disagree with the practice of drawing down on a suspect at level 1. My life is no less important than yours.

Now, racial profiling...

Justified when part of an overall description or profile.

Good: stopping a 30 something 5'7" hispanic male with a beard and bald head as related by the victim of a nearby robbery.

Bad: stopping a black man because he is driving in a white neighborhood.

[zxcvbob]

Here's a hint: Drawn weapons are still Level 1, Officer presence. Unless the officer shoots you (Deadly Force, Level 6), he/she is still acting under Level 1. Get over it.

You go around pointing your weapon at people for no reason other than to intimidate them, they are within their rights to kill you; you are just lucky that they don't have the inclination, nor (usually) the ability to do so because you have the drop on them. One of these days your luck will run out and it'll be your own damn fault.

You want to unsnap your holster and have you hand on your gun when you approach someone who is armed (but no reason to believe they are dangerous or up to no-good), I'll give you that for "officer presence" even though the same action would be illegal if a non-LEO did it.

[bigbaby]

Aguila: first you give me the choice of being called a liar or someone who would look the other way when an unarmed man is being murdered by my Marines, now you have called an LEO a disgrace for doing his job; making friends here I see LOL

[MLeake]

Glenn Dee and JGCoastie,

I see neither of you have addressed hogdogs' point about conservation officers / game wardens, but it was a good point. They are dealing with guys who they KNOW are carrying guns, typically rifles, shotguns, or big-bore handguns. In many cases, those folks will have a long gun in hand.

I don't often hear of conservation officers or game wardens making an approach with a drawn weapon aimed at a hunter's COM.

If you want to use the "license" issue, these officers could do a very similar check, for a hunting license vs a carry license. Either way, hunting in the woods or carrying in Philadelphia, the person has to have a license.

So why do Philadelphia cops approach with drawn guns, when game wardens typically do not?

(Oh, by the way, when last I lived in Florida, conservation and game warden types had higher per capita shooting incidents than the regular LE agencies, primarily due to stumbling across marijuana crops. In fact, I suspect many such officers in many states have more dangerous dealings than do most Philadelphia police.)

JGCoastie, a drawn weapon, held at low ready, might arguably be called "officer presence." That same weapon, aimed center mass, without any cause would arguably be called "assault."

[bigbaby]

Mleake; the one difference between DNR and the local Police is this: the DNR expect to encounter hunters, during hunting season the armed men they encounter are typically not dangerous unless you are a whitetail; When the local Police encounter armed men they typically are a threat to them and us(I am not saying all OCers are dangerous to the cops) In Philly if you are wearing a weapon, openly considering the law, if I were a cop, I would probably figure a thug is gonna hide his piece. So I would probably not have drawn down on the dude, but I AIN"T NO COP so what do I know to tell a Philly COP what to do?

[hogdogs]

Mleake; the one difference between DNR and the local Police is this: the DNR expect to encounter hunters, during hunting season the armed men they encounter are typically not dangerous unless you are a whitetail;

Actually you are wrong! Typically the percentage of "hunters" in the woods without a license or planning to commit a wildlife violation are far from ZERO%... and then they have the VERY REAL risk that the hunter they are about to make contact with is a convicted felon who knows he lost his gun rights! And yet I just found a tree trunk to lean my gun on after I cleared the chamber so I could pull out my license for the officer!!!

In FLA these same officers are the "fish cops" and they are tasked with keeping drunk boaters off the water.... They can expect 100% of the boats to have a gun aboard and a DRUNK operator and occupants. Never been drawn on before a "courtesy (never understood that term) stop" to check my ability or my catch commenced.

When the local Police encounter armed men they typically are a threat to them and us(I am not saying all OCers are dangerous to the cops)

What sort of miniscule percentage of citizens that these cops have contacted in the past to base this on have been openly armed with a HOLSTERED EXPOSED firearm? And what smaller percentage of the miniscule percent turned out to be up to nefarious behavior? That one just won't hold water with this fella!

In Philly if you are wearing a weapon, openly considering the law, if I were a cop, I would probably figure a thug is gonna hide his piece. So I would probably not have drawn down on the dude, but I AIN"T NO COP so what do I know to tell a Philly COP what to do?

And you, sir, just made the point for all of us against the way this was handled!!!
Brent

[Musketeer]

Mleake; the one difference between DNR and the local Police is this: the DNR expect to encounter hunters, during hunting season the armed men they encounter are typically not dangerous

It is not the lawfully open carrying civilian's fault that the LEO has been improperly trained and is misusing his authority. LEOs in PA have been told this is legal and have chosen to ignore the law in this case.

[secret_agent_man]

And to be quite honest, when I'm wearing my LEO hat, if I see a weapon, or have reasonable suspicion of a person's immediate access to a weapon, my gun will be drawn.

Period.

I have a wife and two young children to go home to; and I will do everything within my power to do exactly that.

I know you don't have any reasonable suspicion/probable cause under any circumstances because I do not break any laws. So when you stop me, I know in advance it is a prima facie illegal detention.

So consider this from your point of view. If I see you begin to draw level one, I'm drawing level six in the "force continuum" and you are going down. I'm betting you cannot beat me to the trigger pull if you are drawing not to fire.

Of course, as a lawful handgun carrier, I only draw to fire, which never happens until you come along with your frontier tinhorn lawman mentality.

You see, I have a wife and four children to go home to, and I don't suffer fools well. I may do time, but I will win on appeal if convicted, and I will eventually get home.

I hate to ratchet up the rhetoric here folks, being a newcomer and all, but this guy deserved a reality check.

Frankly, that Philly cop who assaulted Firorino is lucky he isn't six feet in the ground right now. “Get on your knees” and “I’m going to shoot you” while held at gunpoint? Clearly self defense was warranted.

[Jim March]

jgcoastie: A police officer who started an unlawful gunfight with me would be making a mistake. And if they pull a gun on me without lawful cause, that's exactly what they'd have done. My best bet isn't to go for my weapon, it's to jump or dive behind cover, THEN draw, then engage from behind cover.

It gets worse. At that point, they don't just have to worry about me. It just became legal for anybody else to put a bullet in the back of their head as a "defense of others" case.

Starting gunfights with random strangers is not conducive to going home in one piece every night.

[Wildalaska]

jgcoastie: A police officer who started an unlawful gunfight with me would be making a mistake. And if they pull a gun on me without lawful cause, that's exactly what they'd have done. My best bet isn't to go for my weapon, it's to jump or dive behind cover, THEN draw, then engage from behind cover.

This thread should be closed on that low note:barf:

WildthankgodwehavelawsinplaceAlaska ™©2002-2011

[hogdogs]

c'mon folks... Watch the rhetoric... This will get closed for posts that are seemingly inviting violence etc.... I would like it to stay open for good discussion!

Last one got closed for cop bashin' I was surprised this one wasn't just called an extension of that one and immediately closed.

If we keep it civil "them brown shirt, jack booted thug" moderators won't have to pull out their .45cal lock button on us like that philly copper did to the legal oc guy.

Brent

[Nitesites]

Gentlemen,

Let's control ourselves. Less bravado and more informative. This topic is worth discussion. Avoid getting it shutdown.

[MLeake]

bigbaby, whether an armed person in Philadelphia would make you or an officer nervous is beside the point: the fact remains that it is not prima facie illegal behavior.

Sgt Daugherty is solely responsible for creating the initial conflict, due to his over-the-top metho of checking ID. His Chief's words, after the fact, make it seem even more likely than I had initially thought that the problem, and attitude, is institutional in Philly.

I never OC, but next time I am in Philly I just might...

[vranasaurus]

Why is the cop not being prosecuted for official oppression and simple assault?

§ 5301. Official oppression.

A person acting or purporting to act in an official capacity or taking advantage of such actual or purported capacity commits a misdemeanor of the second degree if, knowing that his conduct is illegal, he:

(1) subjects another to arrest, detention, search,seizure, mistreatment, dispossession, assessment, lien orother infringement of personal or property rights; or

(2) denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity.

If the charges weren't filed until after the audio was released it doesn't look but I am sure the DA has unlimited discretion.

[secret_agent_man]

Closing the thread was not mentioned when the cop said he was going home at all costs to others. Now that some have expressed their views with guns pointed in the other direction, it's close to closing time.

This is a topic that needs to be aired in light of what happened in Philidelphia and in view of the many incidents in recent memory in which police behavior is questionable. Locking a relevant and timely topic is not what an internet message board should be about. JMHO.

[Nitesites]

I understand what you are saying. But what we say and how we say it give weight to the value of our argument. The event that is the focus of this discussion demands attention. Let us maintain a fair amount of dignity in our responses.

With that I shall remain a reader.

[Daugherty16]

First of all, his overriding concern for self-safety would have been better served by observing Mr. Fiorino from a safe distance while calling for backup. Instead, his fear fueled his attitude as can clearly heard on the recording as he accosted the young man. Also, if Fiorino was headed off to commit a criminal act, Dougherty might have remained low-key and been in prime location to stop the crime in process. Instead, he leaped into action, gun drawn and swearing like a sailor. Had Fiorino's situational awareness been keen enough to detect the Sgt's approach, gun drawn, a gunfight might have ensued right there on the street. All things considered, Dougherty's actions on just this basis alone were dangerous and irrational.

Second, Dougherty's ignorance of the law provoked the entire situation and dramatically colored his approach and treatment of Fiorino. Sorry folks, but police are no more insulated from ignorance of the law than are civilians. Now i myself am not a believer in open carry, and this illustrates one of the reasons, but legal behavior is legal behavior. I expect this police chief is creating a precedent for Philadelphia that he will learn to regret when the civil rights lawsuits get decided.

It's a good thing no one was shot. It seems rather clear that the DA filing charges against Fiorino is in retaliation for posting the recording on the web. But if allowing the public to hear how a veteran police officer mishandled an arrest is a crime, why isn't he charged with that? Charging him with obstruction or whatever is just silly.

[hogdogs]

s.a.m., You are correct! This forum does not claim equality. The discussion of drawing on and firing on an officer as an acceptable thing just won't fly...

I am no mod but see their point... Not to mention the owner of the forum also owns SWAT magazine...

I consider us lucky to have this forum where legal citizens and officers can see who can, intellectually, pee higher up the wall...

Most forums with an affinity to LEO's is off limits to the non badge toting citizen... those forums that do allow citizens to post sort of require that only "cop lovers" are allowed!

this forum is a unique situation and I, personally, do not mind the rules in place!

I, as the mods, will tell anyone... "If you don't like the rules of etiquette or protocol of this forum.... don't let the door hitcha where the good lord splitcha..."

But this is only my opinion and if I am wrong... the mods will tongue (finger in this case) lash me but good...

Brent