Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

My yearly detainment in Portland.(ME open carry)
opencarry.org ^ | 26 May, 2012 | boyscout399

Posted on 05/27/2012 7:20:05 AM PDT by marktwain

I guess it's that time of year again. It seems every spring I get stopped by the Portland PD.

I got video this time

I also wrote an email to the police chief:

Chief Sauschuck,

On 26MAY2012 at about 17:15 I was stopped by Officer J McDonald. I recorded a video of the stop for my protection. You can view the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfdEbe7e9GE

Officer McDonald claimed to have received calls that I was walking around with a holstered firearm. This is a legal activity in Maine. He stopped me, put on gloves, and removed my weapon from me. I told him I do not consent to any searches or seizures. He unloaded my firearm and before ejecting the round from the chamber, he pointed my loaded firearm at my legs. This is unacceptable behavior.

There are many things that need to be taken into account here. Terry v Ohio requires three criteria to be met in order to disarm an individual. The officer must have a suspicion that the individual is armed. The officer must have a suspicion that the individual is dangerous. Thirdly, the officer must have a reasonable suspicion that the individual has committed or is about to commit a crime. Officer McDonald admitted in this video that the only reason he stopped me was for the legal carrying of my firearm and that he did not have any reason to suspect me of crime. Therefore, the seizure of my firearm was not allowed under Terry.

Secondly, having no suspicion of crime, why was I not free to go? Delaware v Prouse says that an officer cannot detain someone without reasonable suspicion of crime. McDonald had none. This is a sign of poor training and I want to bring it to your attention so that it can be easily remedied. All of your officers should know that they must have a suspicion of an actual crime before making a detainment.

Thirdly, Officer McDonald demanded my ID and would not return my firearm to me when I requested to end the encounter. Maine law in Title 17A Sec 15-A only requires someone to provide their name and DOB if the officer is issuing a summons to the individual. The officer said he needed to see my ID to ensure that I was not a felon. When asked if he had any reason to believe I was a felon, he said he did not. Again, he is making demands and detaining me without suspicion of any criminal activity. Terry requires more than a mere hunch to initiate a detainment. Hiibel v Nevada and Brown v Texas both require reasonable suspicion of crime before demanding an ID.

Officer McDonald admitted that the only reason why he stopped me was because of my legally carried firearm. I would like to point you to US v DeBerry from the 7th Circuit. In that ruling a federal judge said that a the presence of a firearm where legal to possess cannot by itself be reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

I believe that a lot of progress has been made under your direction to restore proper and legal police work in your city. I strongly believe that through proper training incidents such as this can be avoided. My suggestion to officers responding to a legally armed man in the future is this: Attempt to initiate a consensual encounter. If the individual does not consent to a police encounter, then observe that individual until such time that the officer develops a reasonable suspicion that crime is afoot. Only then should a detainment be made.

If you would like to discuss this further, please feel free to call. I am not a litigious person, but I do not appreciate violations of my rights.

Signed, XXXXXXXXXX Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; US: Maine
KEYWORDS: banglist; me; opencarry; portland
The police here are looking for a lawsuit for deprevation of rights. Numerous other people carrying openly have received compensation when the department was sued for similar activity.

Clearly, the stop was meant to have a chilling effect on the exercize of the Constitutional right to bear arms.

Please note that I am not writer of the letter.

1 posted on 05/27/2012 7:20:18 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Here is the youtube video mentioned in the letter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfdEbe7e9GE


2 posted on 05/27/2012 7:21:11 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

If what the letter writer states is true, he should sue the police if he hasn’t already.


3 posted on 05/27/2012 7:25:32 AM PDT by Fiji Hill (Deo Vindice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

The dude knew his rights and stood by them peacefully.


4 posted on 05/27/2012 7:31:27 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FRiends
Failure to donate to Free Republic is a crime.
(Donate before I finish my donut and I'll let you off with a warning.)



Click the Pic


Support Free Republic

5 posted on 05/27/2012 7:32:04 AM PDT by deoetdoctrinae (Gun free zones are playgrounds for felons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

If the police in his area are anything like the police in my area, he’s in for some harrassment soon due to his speaking up.


6 posted on 05/27/2012 7:32:21 AM PDT by Darksheare (You will never defeat Bok Choy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Judgments against the city or the police department are not a deterrent. The judgment will only be paid by the city's insurance company or the taxpayers. It is only when there is specific judgment against individual government officials that this behavior will stop.
7 posted on 05/27/2012 7:36:48 AM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain; All
Here is the email for Chief Sauschuck: mjs@portlandmaine.gov

If we email Chief Sauschuck, with a link to the video, we can reinforce the message.

8 posted on 05/27/2012 7:37:00 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marktwain; All
Here is the email that I sent:

Chief Sauschuck:

I recently viewed a video which shows Officer J. McDonald illegally
stopping a citizen who was legally exercising his right to bear arms.
It appears that the purpose of the stop was to create a chilling
effect against the exercise of that right.

I believe that better training can prevent the commission of such
illegal and unconstitutional activity by Portland P.D. officers in the
future.

Here is the link to the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfdEbe7e9GE

9 posted on 05/27/2012 7:43:35 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

Makes one wonder what the OWS is saying when they are against Corporate culture legal protections. I think they want total anarchy followed by arbitrary violent dictats without consequences.

... and basically we are letting these interfering proto-terrorists Ayers-Satan children get free park housing when they should be going to the gallows, “adults” acting worse than spoiled children. Just great.


10 posted on 05/27/2012 7:55:40 AM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

.... and it is no wonder the foolish government is enamored by these “activists”, letting them crap on their own cop cars in obvious self hate and depression.

Wow, the proud to wear the NYPD uniform after 911 have been infiltrated by the Mayor Bloomberg communist bull crap.


11 posted on 05/27/2012 7:58:23 AM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JudgemAll

True. This young man is awesome. I hope all of the NRA members appreciate the fact that this brave American is doing more to secure your rights than 10,000 “lifetime” cardcarrying members will ever do. This is what you HAVE to do to secure your rights. According to the Supreme Court you must be a “beligerent claimant” in ALL matters when your rights are challenged, or you cannot reclaim those rights at a later date in a court of law. In other words, free countrys are not for pussys, they are for real men.


12 posted on 05/27/2012 8:22:45 AM PDT by HMS Surprise (Chris Christie can still go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: HMS Surprise
"According to the Supreme Court you must be a “beligerent claimant” in ALL matters when your rights are challenged, or you cannot reclaim those rights at a later date in a court of law. In other words, free countrys are not for pussys, they are for real men."

Amen brother.

13 posted on 05/27/2012 8:42:37 AM PDT by IYellAtMyTV (Je t'aime, faire du bruit comme le cochon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

My guess is that the LEOs involved will enter some dubious NCICs codes against his name so that the next time he applies to renew the license, it will be rejected. LEOs don’t like to be confronted peacefully with the laws as they are (not how they imagine), especially where there is no overt physical resistance - they ‘hate’ that. It takes away their ability to claim they were afraid for their lives.


14 posted on 05/27/2012 8:43:11 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

bttt


15 posted on 05/27/2012 8:56:10 AM PDT by TEXOKIE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HMS Surprise
I am not a litigious person, but I do not appreciate violations of my rights.

He's just a kid, so there is no reason to brate him for his idealism, but what he said was

"Keep up doing what you're doing"

16 posted on 05/27/2012 9:05:26 AM PDT by Balding_Eagle (Liberals, at their core, are aggressive & dangerous to everyone around them,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

I would bet he makes the TSA no fly list....


17 posted on 05/27/2012 9:10:54 AM PDT by BubbaJunebug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BubbaJunebug

And a lot more.


18 posted on 05/27/2012 9:11:56 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: HMS Surprise

Yeah, they are coming for us with their entitlement one way or another. Being proactive like this is savings ahead. And where corrupt cities cannot be taught and self dignify, then they can be submitted. THat’s the essence of the Constitution and the need to stop this corrupt “uniform worship” pay for it arrogance, when we know we pay for it, but not like this, sheesh.


19 posted on 05/27/2012 9:18:00 AM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

This cop and many like him, are assholes and shouldn’t be allowed to carry a gun or suck off the taxpayer for their license to bully.


20 posted on 05/27/2012 11:30:43 AM PDT by thethirddegree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Last year when they had the fires in Arizona a man I know was forced to evacuate and according to the Sheriff’s department his door was open so they had to enter the residence and investigate. He returned to a note from the sheriff that he had too many guns.


21 posted on 05/27/2012 1:01:18 PM PDT by tiki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

l think I might have added a paragraph noting that, since this had been brought to his attention, the next occurrance would lead to a complaint to the Justice Department against the officer and the entire chain of command up to and including Police Chief himself for “deprevation of rights under color of law”. The city wouldn’t pay, the individuals would pay with time in jail ... and “ignorance of the law” would be no excuse.


22 posted on 05/27/2012 3:42:16 PM PDT by Mack the knife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mack the knife

That is a good idea. You could send him an email to that effect.


23 posted on 05/27/2012 4:10:30 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Edumacating the LEOs one peckerhead at a time.


24 posted on 05/27/2012 8:10:04 PM PDT by Tainan (Cogito, ergo conservatus sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill; All
Here is the reply to the email that I sent to Chief Sauschuck:

I do appreciate you bringing this matter to my attention Mr. Weingarten. Thanks...Mike

Michael J. Sauschuck
Chief of Police
Portland Police Department
109 Middle Street
Portland, Maine 04101
207-874-8601
“Leadership, Integrity, and Service”

Chief Sauschuck:

I recently viewed a video which shows Officer J. McDonald illegally
stopping a citizen who was legally exercising his right to bear arms.
It appears that the purpose of the stop was to create a chilling
effect against the exercise of that right.

I believe that better training can prevent the commission of such
illegal and unconstitutional activity by Portland P.D. officers in the
future.

Here is the link to the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfdEbe7e9GE

25 posted on 06/03/2012 3:39:41 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

They don’t have his name. That was the whole point. He refused to give his id and was released.


26 posted on 06/08/2013 2:58:19 PM PDT by trcoker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson