Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Reloadron
This will only lead to a collection of scared but well intention citizens calling 911 about a man with a gun. The police will be obligated to respond ...
|
I have some question about the legal basis for "The police will be obligated to respond." I know that the S.O.P for probably every department in the country is that they
WILL respond to a call about a man with a gun, but are they actually "obligated" to do so? I respectfully submit that they are not obligated to do so, and that we need to do a better job of educating the police, the media, and the populace to eradicate what I believe to be a false belief.
To look at it logically,
why would the police be obligated to respond to a call about a man wearing a gun ... in a jurisdiction that allows citizens to legally carry a firearm? Since when, in the absence of some indication or report of UNlawful activity, is a police officer "obligated" to investigate apparently lawful activity? What is the officer investigating? Lawful behavior.
The corollary is driving a car. If you argue that, "In my state a permit is required to carry, so without investigating there's no way to know whether or not the person has a permit." Okay, but in every state in this country a license is required to operate a motor vehicle on public streets and roads. If you follow the "How do you know he has a permit ..." logic, the obvious conclusion is that the police should be stopping every car they see to verify that the driver has a license. But if they did that, the outcry would be deafening, and the ACLU would have a field day.
Why is wearing a gun -- concealed or openly -- any different? If carry is legal, then an officer should not be entitled/authorized to stop the bearer and ask to see his/her permit (in states that require them) unless there is some genuine indication of unlawful activity by the bearer. Just as the police don't stop drivers and ask for their license unless they commit some sort of infraction, like speeding, running a red light, driving with defective equipment, etc.
So, IMHO, the proper response to a man with a gun call should begin with the dispatcher. The call comes in from a breathless citizen excitedly reporting a "man with a gun." The first question should be:
D: What is the person doing with the gun?
C: He's ... he's .. he has this BIG GUN in a BLACK holster on his belt!!!!!
D: Okay, but is he doing anything illegal with the gun, like waving it around or pointing at people?
C: Well, no,
not yet. But, but ... it's a GUN! Please send the SWAT team as quick as you can!
D: M'am, it's legal to carry a gun in this state. Unless he's doing something illegal, we have no reason to waste our officers' time investigating. Have a nice day.
That's in an ideal world ... which we almost certainly will not see within my lifetime. Despite the legal requirements established in
Terry v. Ohio.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio