Suit seeks to halt harassment of citizens carrying firearms in Wheeling

[Bold Lib]

WHEELING - Two Ohio County men are challenging what they claim is a campaign of harassment by Wheeling police against citizens lawfully carrying firearms in the Friendly City.

According the suit, Jewell, like Kotson, admitted while the open-carry of a firearm was legal in West Virginia, "'The mere carrying of a gun is suspicious and thus grounds for the stop.'" He added, "'The police can stop any person with a weapon at any time and run their name and the gun's numbers."

In the course of the conservation, Keith alleges Matheny added that "'until a court directs me otherwise, will be the policy of the Wheeling Police Department' to stop, detain, disarm and question any individual who openly carries a handgun."

http://wvrecord.com/news/236624-suit-seeks-to-halt-harassment-of-citizens-carrying-firearms-in-wheeling

Please go read the whole article. Aside from the outrageous position of the police, that legal activity gives rise to P.C., there is also some very disturbing unsafe gun handling on the part of the police.

[jpak]

1. cry babies

:rofl:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

6. Yup, crying all the way to the bank

Even WV cops should have twigged to fact they were dealing with a RKBA oriented lawyer. This is going to cost this city a serious apology at best and some serious penalties at worst. If they do it enough times it could go class action (despite the WalMart decision).

[jpak]

7. Dream on

yup

[ProgressiveProfessor]

55. Given how many municipalities are losing such suits, its not a dream

[SteveW]

17. Wow. Contrary to pop. op., WV must have a ton of cash on-hand...

...to settle lawsuits.

[aikoaiko]

54. It always astonishing how much the anti-gun crowd hates civil liberties

It is a failed strategy, but carry on...

[rrneck]

2. Wheeling PD should write a textbook on how to invite a lawsuit. nt

[ThatPoetGuy]

3. Good for them! I like reading stories about police doing the right thing.

nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. Actually the lawsuit is the right thing

Think about this on a higher level, if the police can stop detain, search anyone because they consider something unusual, even though it is legal, where does that stop. This is already happening to photographers.

[slackmaster]

8. We Love Police States!

:sarcasm:

[stockholmer]

12. am I missing the sarcasm? if not, get ready for the sheep pen

[hack89]

18. True - unfettered exercise of civil rights is dangerous

don't want the common people to get any ideas.

[PavePusher]

19. Are you confused? Or just confusing? n/t

[gejohnston]

35. Yet another faux liberal. If Rachel took a dislike to people with beards

then it hit crooks and liars that people with beards regressive rednecks, they you would be for arresting people simply for having beards and wearing cowboy boots.

[PavePusher]

40. Ummm, I think that got lost in translation.

Can you clean it up a bit?

[gejohnston]

63. my bad, ADD kicking in again where brain runs faster than fingers

If Rachel decided that people with beards and cowboy boots are regressive rednecks undeserving of rights, then repeated at crooksandliars.com,you would be for arresting people simply for having beards and wearing cowboy boots.

[PavePusher]

65. mo'betta, thanks.

It happens. I blame my stupid sausage fingers....

[ProgressiveProfessor]

4. I hear a ka-ching in the future or the police chief getting redirected by the city government

While I prefer concealed carry over open in most circumstances, if it is legal, to harass those doing it is place the city at serious financial risk.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spin]

10. The job of the police is to enforce the law ...

if there is a problem with the law it needs to be changed and that can be done by the voters or the legislature.

If Virginians want to change their gun laws, this can be accomplished.

It is NOT the job of the police to enforce laws that do not exist.

[Lasher]

43. Virginians can't change our laws.

But they can change their own.

[Blown330]

11. They should be protecting the citizenry...

...instead of picking on law abiding citizens. Testament to those cops to go after easy targets where they can act tough and know that they won't be putting themselves in danger. Meanwhile somebody is mugged, beaten, raped, or robbed in another part of town.

[petronius]

16. I'd say creeping authoritarianism and a militarized us-versus-them attitude

infecting some police officers and departments are far more serious concerns to the health of the nation than the nuttiest of your undefined "gunnuttery" could ever be. (What does that mean, btw - people insisting that the law be obeyed and their rights respected?)

Far too many liberals are willing to see far too many limitations on far too many freedoms in the name of some nebulous 'safety'...

[ileus]

13. When are LEO's going to start doing the right thing and respect the second and citizens?

[spin]

14. When the city starts losing law suits. (n/t)

[Blown330]

15. Probably not until they've been sued...

...into enough corrective training to change their attitudes.

[Hoyt]

20. I think the police are right. Otherwise, criminals can walk down the street with a gun on their hip

and run little risk of being stopped. The police should stop anyone toting a gun to check that they have correct papers. Citizens should report someone with a gun on their hip, pocket or wherever.

Similarly, police should question someone with a machete, speargun, bomb, chainsaw, bag of dog stuff, etc.

If you don't want to be stopped -- "harassed" if you like -- leave the things at home. It's that simple.

[DonP]

21. Ah! Another advocate of the Bull Connor school of policing

"Y'all just let me handle what's best for this community. I don't need no gawdamn law to tell me what my people want."

Police should question anyone they find suspicious right? And if they deny a request to search them and their vehicle they are obviously hiding something so it's OK to search anyway.

Another fan of a police state checks in. Feel the same way about "outside agitators" with protest signs too I bet.

[rrneck]

22. I am thankful

I live in a country that proves your post is the pile of rancid buzzard gagging maggot poisoning effervescent bullshit that it is.

[Hoyt]

25. I once had an honest to God Grand Wizzard of the KKK tell me much the same thing.

[petronius]

26. You probably mean that as a slam, but your attempted insult shows doubly

the hollowness of your position: first, attempting to lump gun owners (and rrneck in particular) with the klan is childish snark - playground insults are the refuge of trolls and those with nothing coherent to say. More importantly the klan, as vile as it is, is entitled to all the rights and protections as anyone else, as long as it obeys the law. Liberals support freedom of speech and assembly even in the case of the klan and we'd oppose police acting illegally to shut them down; that you apparently don't feel that way is further evidence of your extreme disconnect from the principles that most DUers (and liberals in general) value...

[Hoyt]

29. I don't think most liberals "value" toting guns in public. I simply recognized the same language as

I've heard before from folks (who commonly carried and still carry guns and use them to intimidate). Besides, most of the gunners here commonly lump their "plight" with that of people who had few rights at all until passage of Civil Rights Act. The right to carry a gun in public is not even close in comparison.

In any event, when I'm called a "maggot" by one of the small 3 to 4% who think it's proper to tote guns in public -- it's like a flashback.

[petronius]

30. I am continually impressed by your ability to regurgitate the same nonsense while

completely avoiding the point of the discussion... :toast:

[Hoyt]

31. Continually amazed folks would carry in most public places. Glad it's only 3 to 4% so afflicted.

Need to make sure group stays small. Plus, too many TBaggers carry.

[petronius]

32. And an encore, even! Wow - I am awed by your dedication to the performance

:fistbump:

You know, if you ever managed to say something cogent and on topic, you'd be a true forum powerhouse. Unstoppable, even...

[beevul]

34. Can you possibly make it any easier hoyt?

Your posts demonstrate unequivocally and without ANY ambiguity what so ever, that you support applying law based on ones beliefs.


When it comes to being a nation of laws versus a nation of men, it is 100% crystal clear which camp you fall into.


You should be ashamed of yourself.


You claim that you don't think most liberals "value" lawful gun carry.


What would you know?


You sir, are NO liberal.

[eqfan592]

39. Here here!! nt

[Hoyt]

45. So, how can LE and citizens make sure those who walk around with a friggin gun have permit?

If you want to carry a gun in public, you need to be prepared to be checked to make sure you are "lawful." You don't like it -- don't carry.

[hack89]

51. How do the cops know I have a drivers license?

do the cops have the right to pull me over anytime they want to check?

[X_Digger]

57. You won't get a response.. that's where his "logic" breaks. n/t

[rrneck]

33. Apparently you don't do much thinking at all.

It probably has something to do with reading comprehension. Most angry bigots have that same problem.

[gejohnston]

36. I don't give a rats ass what faux liberals value because

they are simply regressive bigots with a different other. If it became that liberal value that people with beards and cowboy boots are regressive rednecks, then it hit crooks and liars that people with beards regressive rednecks, they you would be for arresting people simply for having beards and wearing cowboy boots.

So, how does it make you different than Islamaphobes?

[Hoyt]

46. Nope, just want to make sure someone fool enough to walk around in public with a gun is legit.

Don't like being checked, then suck it up and don't carry.

[Bold Lib]

53. Again, you want the cops to make up law when it suits YOUR desire.

That is NOT a progressive value at all. Just shameful.

[ileus]

64. If you can't trust a person OCin' you can't trust anyone.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spin]

23. So you support the police when they make up the law?

I bet you would love it if I was walking down the street in Florida doing nothing unusual and a cop decided to arrest me for carrying a concealed firearm despite the fact that I have a valid concealed weapons permit.

You would probably be ecstatic if the Florida Highway Patrol set up roadblocks and pulled everybody out of their cars, searched them and arrested everyone who was carrying a firearm even if they had a carry permit.

[Hoyt]

24. Nope, support police when they confront someone packing a gun in public. You can leave em at home.

[beevul]

27. Then you DO in fact support the police when they make up the law.

You can't have it both ways on this one, hoyt.


There is NO middle ground or gray area to be had here, and none you can contrive, invent, or fabricate.


You DO in fact support the police when they make up the law in this case.




Period.


End of story.

[Hoyt]

49. I don't see where the police are "making up the law" when they make sure one with gun is legit.

You don't like getting checked when you are sporting your gun in public, suck it up and take it off.

[rrneck]

52. Looks like

people are taking it to court. And winning. You're the one that's going to have to suck it up.

:rofl:

[gejohnston]

37. you support police making false arrests and violating civil rights, that is not a liberal value.

[spin]

38. So you would indeed support a cop if he arrested me for legally carrying a concealed firearm ...

even after I show him my concealed weapons permit.

Your paranoia amazes me.

[PavePusher]

41. I'm guessing the JBT in him came out again, eh?

You know, I've only got two people on ignore, him being one.

And it's amazing how much better the forum reads without him there.... :shrug:

[gejohnston]

42. JBT?

[diveguy]

44. JBT

jack booted thug

[Hoyt]

48. Sounds like one walking around in public with a friggin gun on their hip and one strapped to leg.

[eqfan592]

59. Yeah, sure it does.

Maybe to those blinded by the gun control reality distortion field....

[Hoyt]

47. No, I would not support that. I do support police checking anyone with gun in public.

Also, I support them checking anyone carrying a sword, machete, club, bomb, bottle of gasoline or acid, spear gun, etc.

[spin]

50. What confuses me is when you say, "anyone with a gun in public" ...

from your reply, I assume you are talking about anyone who is openly carrying a firearm in public.

Open carry is illegal in public in Florida. If I could legally open carry, I would probably continue to carry concealed. I have no desire to disturb or intimidate others. If I lived in an area of the country where open carry was common and accepted, I might consider it.

[beevul]

56. The problem, Hoyt, is that LAWFUL behavior is NOT probable cause for contact.

Thats where the problem - yours and theirs - lies.

[X_Digger]

58. 'checking anyone with a gun in public' -- absent probable cause -- is not legal

Numerous lawsuits have established that in multiple states..

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_17628424

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-washington-dc/alamogordo-police-pay-21-000-to-settle-open-carry-lawsuit

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/10/hours-after-norfolk-city-hall-visit-gun-advocate-detained

http://hamptonroads.com/node/491877

http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/2008/12/10/gco-settles-man-with-a-gun-lawsuit/

[Hoyt]

60. Someone carrying a gun is cause to ask for permits.

Trick is police should not seize a gun unless the permits and such aren't lawful. But, every policeman they pass needs to check and make sure everything is lawful. Life should be tough for those carrying a gun, spear, machete, sword, bomb, bottle of acid, etc., in public. Leave em at home to avoid such.

[X_Digger]

61. Should highway cops get to pull over whomever they like 'to ask for permits'?

Fucking duh, it's called 'probable cause'.

Look it up sometime. *sigh*

[friendly_iconoclast]

62. Where? X_Digger just listed five states (at least) where it is not.

Even the OP is not an example, as the police chief's claim is directly contradicted by WV state law.


You might want the cops to harass those carrying guns, but as one local town near me found out (Wellesley, with their

practice of "Driving While Black/Brown" stops), police harrasment of those not comitting a crime can become a costly practice. I

rather doubt you are running any fundraisers to help defray legal expenses for places like Wheeling...

[PavePusher]

66. Some people hate the Fourth Amendment as much as they hate the Second.

But it's vile and pathetic no matter who it is.