Second Amendment Issues

Quote: Wizard

Surely there must be more to the story (and don't call me Shirley). I'm sure it isn't something you see every day, but I could picture an off duty security guard who forgot to remove his holster walking about. No big deal.

Well, you asked for it. Here is the story. This was posted on the internet somewhere else:

Edit: This was not me.

Detained/Harassed by Las Vegas MPD on The Strip During My New Year's Trip:

The following details my detention and the seizure of some of my property by officers from the Las Vegas Metro Police Department (LVMPD) during my New Year's vacation with some friends in Las Vegas, NV. I was detained for wearing an EMPTY holster. I apologize for the long length of the post, but I tried to convey as much detail as possible to give everyone a clear picture of what happened.

My clothing/attire consisted of the following:
HAT - black baseball cap with the Greek phrase "Molon Labe" in red lettering
(http://lifelibertyetc.com/product.aspx?pid=21)
SHIRT - black T-shirt with the quote "The More Corrupt the State / The More Numerous the Laws ~ Tacitus" in white lettering
(http://www.boffensive.com/store2/cart/product.php?productid=15&cat=1&page=1)
SHOES - blue/black thong sandals
GUN BELT - black Liger belt with black buckle
(http://www.maxpedition.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=16&idproduct=276)
HOLSTER - Blackhawk! Level 3 SERPA Duty Holster screwed onto the belt
(http://www.blackhawk.com/product/Level-3-SERPA-Auto-Lock-Duty-Holster,1175,1412.htm)
SHORTS - six-pocket green cargo shorts carrying the following items:
- R thigh-pocket: cell phone; iPod; lighter; Cuffmate lighted handcuff key
- L thigh-pocket: C2 Taser w/ red laser sight; Fox Labs 4 oz. "Mean Green" pepper spray; small composite notebook; black ball-point pen
- R back-pocket: ASP hinged handcuffs
- L back-pocket: Ka-Bar TDI Model 1480 Law Enforcement Knife
- R side-pocket: nothing
- L side-pocket: wallet w/ AZ DL & CWP, etc.; car keys; house keys attached to a 5-inch black Kubotan with tapered, blunt end (made from molded plastic)

The whole incident was recorded on an Olympus WS-331M digital voice recorder that was hanging around my neck underneath my T-shirt. The following is the transcript of the audio recording (it might not be 100% exact, but I've done the best job I could). Please note that some parts might be left out because they contain private information or it was too difficult to make out the audio. My editorial comments are in brackets. I am not releasing any of the names of the officers involved in this incident. I will work on editing the recording so I can post it to the forum.

Here's a key to the main parties involved:
LC = female officer #1
LC2 = unknown female officer #2
UC = unknown male officer #1
UC2 = unknown male officer #2
SJ = sergeant and lead officer in charge
OSG = O'Shea's security guard #1
OSG2 = O'Shea's security guard #2

[I'm playing craps inside of O'Shea's Casino on the Las Vegas Strip on Sun. morning, 01/04/2009. I've been in the casino for the last nine hours. At ~3:30 AM, I'm approached at the end of the craps table by two female LVMPD officers with two other male officers nearby.]

LC: Can I talk to you for a second?
Me: Yes?
LC: Do- do you have a weapon with you?
Me: No.
LC: You don't?
Me: No. It's an empty holster.
LC: Ok.
Me: I just wear it for a political statement.
LC: Ok.
Me: Same as my shirt and my hat.
LC: Ok. Do you mind, do you mind if I pat you down? I just want to make sure that there's no gun and everyone's safe here and there's no weapon.
Me: Yes, I do mind. I, I- You have no reasonable suspicion to search me. It's an empty holster.
LC: Ok.
Me: I just wore it, you know, as part of my attire.
LC: Ok, so you mind if we pat you down, is that what you're saying? Well, you know what, we need to talk to you for a second. We have the right to find out who you are, ok?
Me: I don't consent to any searches.
LC: I understand, but I'm telling you, we as the police, have the right to find out who you are, so I need you to come with me for a second.
[The LC starts to tug at the side of my shirt and motion me away from the craps table. It is apparent that they are about to detain me.]
Me: All right.
LC: And I need you to keep your hands away from, anything, 'cause if there's anything in your pockets, then we don't want to go ahead and take action. Let's go. Please follow us.
Me: All right.

[I tell the craps dealer to take down all of my odds and they place a towel over my chips at the table to save my spot. I move away from the table and it is at this point that I am handcuffed in front of all the other patrons inside the casino.]

LC: Please step with us over here. Ok, keep your hands where we can see them.
UC: Step over here. Come here, come here. Put your hands behind your back.
[The handcuffs are placed on my wrists.]
UC: Do you have a gun on you?
Me: No.
UC: Is there anything illegal on you?
Me: No. I don't consent to any searches.
UC: Ok, I heard ya.
LC: You didn't give us consent to search; however, we do have the right to- to pat down, ok. I just want to let you know that.
Me: I don't consent to any searches.
LC: We have reasonable suspicion to believe that you have a weapon. The reason is - you have an empty holster. Do you understand what I'm saying?
Me: Except the holster is empty.
LC: I understand that.
Me: It's empty. And it's empty for a reason, because I do not have a weapon.
LC: Oh, ok. So, we have the right, like I said, as police officers, to know who you are. So we have sixty minutes to do so, ok? So, you're gonna come with us and we're going to find out who you are, ok?. That's all.
Me: I'm from out of town.
UC: Well, in Vegas, we don't carry holsters, ok. That's not how we do it out here.
Me: Open carry is legal here.
UC: Let's go. Let's go.
Me: Ok.
LC: Thank you.
SJ: (To LC) Did- did he have one?

[I am now led outside of the casino property onto the sidewalk on Las Vegas Blvd. There had already been two police cruisers parked outside, as well as several other officers on patrol in the area for several hours. By the way, it is REALLY cold outside (in the mid-30s) and I'm standing there in just shorts and a T-shirt (I never expected to be outside for so long).]

UC: Can you stand in front of my car for me, sir?
Me: Right here?
UC: Yep, right there.
Me: Facing the car?
UC: Right here. Right in front of those big bumpers.
Me: In front of the bumper?
UC: Yes, sir.
[At this point, the UC frisks me. He begins to place his hands inside each of my pockets and removes my possessions. They are placed one-by-one on top of the hood of the patrol car. No "probable cause" for the search is stated to me.]
LC: Do you have an ID, sir?
Me: Yes I do.
LC: Wonderful. And where is that located?
Me: It's in my wallet, in my front, left pocket.
LC: In the front, left pocket.
Me: In the little, uh-
LC: Ok. And, what is your social security number, sir?
Me: (I state my correct SSN).
LC: And you are from Arizona?
Me: From Tempe, Arizona.
LC: Ok.
Me: My name is (I state my full name).
LC: Ok, great.
UC2: Where's the gun at, Mike?
LC2: So, what's the statement that you're trying to make?
Me: I am a supporter of the Second Amendment.
LC2: Ok.
Me: As well as the amendment in Arizona, as well as here in Nevada, which allows everyone to carry weapons.
LC2: Ok.
Me: And here, you are allowed to carry, openly or concealed with a permit.
LC2: Right.
Me: I have an Arizona Concealed Weapons Permit (CWP).
LC2: Ok.
Me: That's not recognized by the state of Nevada. However, I am allowed to openly carry here in Nevada.
LC2: Right.
Me: I do not have a firearm on me right now.
LC2: Ok. Well, well- what security's concern was, was that you have the open holster, so they were just wondering where the firearm was.
Me: I do not have a firearm on me.
LC2: Ok, that's fine. That's- we're trying to get that figured out, ok. All you gotta do is co-operate and you'll be on your way.
Me: I don't appreciate being harassed for having an open holster- with nothing in it.
LC2: You're not being harassed.
Me: I, would tend to differ.

[The lead officer in charge, SJ, now comes over to the patrol car and examines my possesions on the hood. He speaks to me from the sidewalk.]
SJ: (In the background to other officers - states something about "some weird shit" and "stab[bing] someone in an alley" or "getting stabbed up in an alley").
SJ: (To officers) What's his name? Michael?
UC2: You carry all that shit with you? A Taser?
Me: Yeah.
SJ: Mike, why you got a holster on and no gun?
Me: I've already explained.
SJ: Ok, explain it again.
Me: Ok, in Nevada, you're allowed-
SJ: I know the law. I'm asking you why you have a holster with no gun.
Me: It's a political statement. It's freedom of expression.
SJ: It is-
Me: The First Amendment-
SJ: -it also draws a lot of attention to you. Unneccessary attention.
Me: So? That's the whole point. That's why it's expression. If no one had noticed it, then there would be no point in making the statement.
SJ: Well, this- this is the statement you're gonna make. When you walk around with a holster on Las Vegas Blvd.-
Me: Ok.
SJ: -and you run into one of my gangsters, he'll put a bullet in you 'cause he'll think you have a gun under there.
Me: I appreciate your concern, but I'm more concerned with the political statement for the reasonable, law-abiding citizens.
SJ: That's, that's fine, but everytime you're walking down the street- You also have the right to walk down the street with a gun in the holster wide open.
Me: Yes?
SJ: Everytime you do that, this is how you end up. You're gonna be dealin' with us everytime.
Me: So, you're saying I'm going to be harassed by the police-
SJ: You're gonna be stopped everytime.
Me: I'm gonna be harassed by the police for-
SJ: Call it what you want.
Me: -lawful, lawful conduct.
SJ: You're gonna be stopped everytime.
Me: Lawful conduct.
SJ: Lawful or not, you're gonna be stopped everytime.
Me: So, you're telling me, uh, if I were wearing a political shirt, you know-
SJ: You're not wearing a political shirt.
Me: -that had an expression that you don't like, I'm gonna be stopped-
SJ: You're not, you're not wearing a political shirt. You're wearing a gun.
Me: Are you kidding me?! Look, look at my shirt.
SJ: I didn't see your shirt.
Me: Look at my shirt.
SJ: I could care less about your shirt. I'm worried about the holster you got on your waist.
Me: Ok, well sir, I'm not going to argue with you.
SJ: A shirt has never put a bullet in my head. A shirt has never hurt me.
Me: I appreciate your concern, but I'm more concerned with my freedom of speech, so I'm not- I'm not gonna argue with you anymore.
SJ: We're not arguing. You've got your freedom of speech.
Me: Ok.
SJ: I'm just letting you know, if you come down here on the Blvd. with a gun or a holster and it's out and we can see it, we're gonna stop you. That's it. That's what we do.
Me: Um-hmm.
SJ: And it's not about being harassed, it's about making sure that you're not gonna walk into a casino and start blasting.
Me: Well, I would really appreciate it if all the officers here could give me their business card-
SJ: You'll get my name, that's it.
Me: So- So, I'll get your name, that's it? That's it?
SJ: That's it.
Me: Oh. Thank you very much.
SJ: I'll give you my name and my badge number-
Me: Thank you, thank you. I appreciate that.
SJ: Got it? You can complain all you want. I'm telling you right now, if you come down here on the strip- (SJ now holds up the kubotan with my keys attached) These things, like this, is that yours?
Me: I'm not talking anymore.
[SJ begins to talk in a very snide, condescending tone.]
SJ: You know the law, right?
Me: I'm not talking.
SJ: Maybe I should make a point and take you to jail for possession of a dangerous weapon. Just to prove a point, Mike. 'Cause you know the law, right? You know the law? I'm waitin'...
Me: I'm not making any more statements.
SJ: But, you say you know the law though?
Me: I'm exercising my Fifth Amendment right to not make any more statements.
SJ: Maybe I should take you to jail for possession of a dangerous weapon. What does it say about that, Mike? (Pauses to wait for my answer.) I'm- you got all the answers. (Pause.) Tell me about that corrupt law right there. What does it say about that thing right there, that dagger you got? You don't know. (SJ turns to the other officers) I don't know. What do you think? Maybe we should take Mike to jail... The guy knows the law, maybe I should take him to jail.
[Throughout the incident, my kubotan is consistently referred to as a "dagger" by SJ and the other officers. According to all the legal definitions I've seen, a dagger is typically a short, double-sided blade attached to a handle with the primary use of stabbing someone (as opposed to in a slicing motion). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagger. My kubotan is made out of plastic, has no sharp edges, and is designed as a defensive weapon to jab at one's attacker. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kubaton. I don't think that's the same as a "dagger" as cited in NRS 202.350(1)(d)(2) (although, the term "dagger" itself is not defined within the NRS). I suppose they could have tried to charge me with the catch-all "...or other dangerous or deadly weapon" as in NRS 202.350(1)(d)(3), but I think that would be a stretch.]

[At this point, UC begins the procedure to uncuff me and informs me I can now place my hands down at my sides. I have been detained in handcuffs for approximately eight minutes.]
Me: Are you sure?
UC: You can put your hands down there now. Ok, well here's the deal, Mike. Where are you staying at?
Me: I’m not making any more statements.
UC: Ok. Um, I'm pretty sure they're not gonna want you back in O'Shea's, just so you know. I don't know if they're gonna trespass you or not, but that's probably what's gonna happen.
Me: I'd like to talk to the manager if that's possible.
UC: Well, I'll see what they say, but I'm just telling you, they're probably not gonna let you just walk back in there. I'll ask them though, ok? Would you like me to? Yes or no?
Me: If you can get the manager, I can speak to him, or her.
UC: I'm gonna ask security if they want you back in there or not.
Me: Yes. Yes, please tell them, please tell them-
UC: No, I'm just gonna ask them-
Me: Ok.
[In the background, SJ informs LC that she should impound my kubotan as evidence and he calls me a "smart ass." SJ asks if I have any money in the casino and LC informs him that I still have chips at the craps table. An O'Shea's security guard comes over to talk to me.]

OSG: Hey Michael.
Me: Yes.
OSG: We have your money at the cage right there, but I'm gonna have to trespass you, ok?
Me: You're- Are you?-
OSG: You're gonna be trespassing on the property, yes.
Me: May I ask you why?
OSG: Yeah, the weapons are very inappropriate. We don't, uh-
Me: Can I ask you which one you find-
OSG: Pardon me?
Me: May I ask you which one you find inappropriate?
OSG: Uh, the management finds inappropriate the dagger and the firearm-
Me: The imaginary firearm, sir?
OSG: Listen, let me say something. You can take it up with management. I really don't care. I'm trespassing you. Whether you like it or not, you're being trespassed, ok?
Me: I don't-
OSG: You're gonna go get your money and then you're gonna leave.
Me: Ok, I, I- I don't mean to argue with you-
OSG: I'm not gonna argue with you. So, I'm gonna trespass you and then you're gonna be on your way, ok? I don't have time for that, ok? So, you opened yourself up for that, so we're not gonna discuss that, ok?
Me: I'm sorry if I offended you in some way.
OSG: Listen, listen. I need you to listen.
Me: I’m listening.
OSG: [Reading from a card.] As a duly appointed representative of the property of the owner, I am hereby trespassing you. If you return to this property, you'll be subject to arrest, subject to a misdemeanor. Do you understand?
Me: Yes, I do.
OSG: I'm gonna take you back inside and get you your chips and you're money-
Me: Yes.
OSG: -when Metro's done with you-
Me: Ok.
OSG: -then you have the right to leave. You'll be trespassing at O'Shea's, Flamingo, Imperial Palace.
Me: Ok.
OSG: Ok, anything ran by Harrah's, you can't come back. Any Harrah's property.
Me: Any Harrah's property.
OSG: Do you understand what I've told you?
Me: Yes, I do.
OSG: I appreciate that sir, thank you. You can grab your wallet- (Turns to LC.) I don't know, are you done with him?
LC: Uh, yeah, we're not done with him yet.
SJ: He's got to deal with us.
OSG: Do you want me to go take him back in to get his money?
SJ: Oh yeah. You know what? Does he have to go get the money?
OSG: I can't touch it.
SJ: Ok.
OSG: He's got to go in and get his own money.
SJ: Ok, let's uh, let's walk him in and get his money so he can get that done and bring him back out here.
LC: All right, sir. What we're gonna do is we're gonna go walk in there, we're gonna leave your property here, we're gonna get your money and come back out here, ok?
Me: Ok.
LC: Let’s go ahead and do that.
Me: I am allowed to go in and retrieve my money?
LC: Yeah, that's what we're gonna do right now.
Me: Thank you.

[I'm escorted back into O'Shea's by OSG and LC, along with a few other officers.]
LC: The money's over here, correct? Ok, let's go over there and get it. Where's the money?
OSG: The money's been taken to the cage. The pit person cashed it out and it's all been taken to the cage.
LC: So, the money's this way?
OSG: Yes.
LC: Ok, let's follow him.
[We make it over to the cashier cage where an elderly woman (CW) is working behind the counter.]
CW: He's the player?
OSG: This is the player. Yes, ma'am.
CW: Ok. You are?
Me: Excuse me?
CW: What's your name?
Me: Michael.
CW: Where's your ID, Michael?
Me: My ID is currently outside.
CW: This is him, right?
OSG: Yeah, that's him.
CW: Ok, I need you to verify me returning this-
OSG: Ok.
CW: -because the pit girl came and signed it. The amount comes to 366.
Me: Yes.
CW: Ok, did you want to cash it in, Michael or did you want chips-
OSG: He's cashing out. He has to cash them out. He's not allowed back on the property.
[The CW counts out the money and places it in front of me. I initial a sheet of paper with the info. on it.]
Me: Thank you very much.
CW: Thank you. Have a great day.
Me: Thank you. You, too.

[At this point, something truly bizarre happens (and probably very fortunate in my favor). O'Shea's security gets a report about a man with a gun in the bathroom of the casino. Apparently, a man in his 20s carrying a concealed firearm either tripped and fell or the gun simply slipped out of his pants. In any case, about eight LVMPD officers run to the bathroom to assess the situation.]
OSG: I've- I've got a report of somebody- a confirmed report of somebody with a gun in the bathroom. (To LC) They're confirming a gun in the bathroom.
LC: Watch him.
Me: I'm standing right here. I'll stand right here.
OSG: I appreciate that. Dispatch, everyone's going. Just do me a favor for a minute. Just turn your back towards the cage, no, no, no turn your back this way and remove your cap for me. My camera wants to take a picture of you. Hold on. [I take off my hat and look up at the ceiling camera.] Cam one, did you get a picture of my man here at the cage? I'll walk you out.
Me: Um, should I stay here for them?
OSG: No. They're out there anyway, so I'm gonna walk you out. Is that cool?
Me: Yeah, I don't know if they want-
OSG: They've still got your stuff out there, so I'm gonna take you out to them.
Me: All right. I don't know if they want me to put this [the money] in my pocket, so I'm just gonna hold this.
OSG: Oh, that's yours. You can put it in your pocket. That's fine.
Me: I don't know what they want me to do.
OSG: Well, I'm gonna take you back out to them. We're done as far as us.
Me: All right. I know you're just doing your job, but honestly, I've been here for the last ten hours playing peacefully with no problem. I've barely said a word to anyone.
[OSG escorts me back outside.]
Me: Thank you.
OSG: We're just gonna hang here for a minute. We can hang here in the doorway. Why don't you hang back here? It's a little bit warmer.
Me: It's ok. I'm all right.
OSG: Well, you gotta understand. Somebody, somebody- that made somebody uncomfortable, you know what I'm saying?
Me: It was a particular-?
OSG: I can't tell you who or what it was.
Me: I understand.
OSG: Ok, maybe- maybe a lot of people didn't pay no mind to it, or maybe the average person walked by and didn't think nothing about an empty holster-
Me: It's just-
OSG: -you know what I mean.
Me: It's unfortunate that one complaint from someone who has an irrational fear negates my Amendment- First Amendment right for freedom of expression to support Second Amendment rights by wearing an empty holster. And yet, they're allowed to continue playing when I did nothing wrong.
OSG: No, but you, uh- Well, you know.
Me: I don't know what else to tell ya. You know, it's- people are afraid of everything and it's unfortunate that my lawful conduct made someone fear, that they kicked me out.
OSG: Well, ya know-
Me: I know you’re just-
OSG: I just have to address management's positions-
Me: I know you're just-
OSG: -and I don't really have a choice-
Me: I know you're just doing your job, but-
OSG: I would have- I could have personally said that I think it's all right, ya know what I mean? I don't have a personal issue with it. I can't really make personal decisions.
Me: I understand.
OSG: You know what I'm saying? Opinions are only allowed so much. You understand what I'm saying? And, you know, I support the- I support the freedom of speech, freedom of having a weapon, especially if you're smart enough to use one and defend yourself. I totally agree, because- I would rather have one than have the other guy have one, you know what I'm saying?
Me: Uh, can I ask you one question?
OSG: Yes, sir.
Me: Uh- Now you've warned me that returning to any of the Harrah's Corporation properties-
OSG: Well, actually-
Me: -will be trespassing?
OSG: At this point- At this point, you're just trespassing with O'Shea's and Flamingo.
Me: Ok.
OSG: If you- If you get stopped at another property and they run your name- and depending on what you- if you're trespassing there- you'd just be trespassing on that property.
Me: Right.
OSG: So you can actually go to Caesar's, Harrah's, and Imperial and all that stuff. If they run your name because you've done something else- you see what I'm saying? Security actually runs your name.
Me: This is the first-
OSG: So, you'll be fine.
Me: This is the first run-in I've ever had with management of a corporation, hotel, casino chain, or any police interaction [besides a speeding ticket]. (Long pause.) Do you know if my friend Jon is inside? He was out here when the police were here. He had a blue and black scarf on.
OSG: Yeah, I know who you're talking about. I'm gonna go see- Let me take you back to this guy right here.
Me: Ok.
SJ: (In the background) Hey, are we done with Mike? Hey, T.J., go back with ?? real quick.
[It's at this point that the man with the gun in the O'Shea's bathroom is brought outside in handcuffs. Two of his friends (black, mid-20s) follow him out and begin to approach the police and become belligerent. Even after being warned to back off, they continue to approach the officers and yell profanities in their faces. Bad move. Both of the guy's friends are taken down to the ground and placed in cuffs and searched while LC stands over one of them with her Taser drawn. My friend Jon and I just step back and watch all the action go down. Now, all three men are being detained by the police in a much more serious situation than my own. One of them continues to yell profanities and makes claims of police brutality and racial mistreatment by SJ (who himself was black).]
SJ: Put him in the car! Bring me another car. Put him in the back of the car.
[More shouting from the two friends.]
LC: Relax!

[Another O'Shea's security guard brings some of my belongings over to me.]
OSG: Hang on just a second. Hang on just a second.
Me: These are all of my materials?
OSG2: That's all your materials right there. This is your's, too, right?
Me: Yes.
OSG2: Just take them and leave, bro. Ya know. (laughs)
Me: I- I just want to double check that I have all of my property back.
OSG2: Oh, you've got your money, too?
Me: I have- Yeah, my money, my wallet- Um-
OSG2: You've got your hand keys for your handcuffs?
Me: I have the return of my ID? It doesn't look like I have my driver's license.
Jon: It looks like it's still up on the hood.
[More commotion from the three young men. SJ informs the most belligerent suspect that he's going to jail.]
OSG2: You wanna go out there and get your ID?
Me: Excuse me?
OSG2: You wanna go out there and get your ID?
Me: Uh, if you could bring it to me, that would be appreciated.
[I check to make sure I have all of my stuff back.]
Me: And my house keys? That were attached to the kubotan, the black kubotan-
OSG2: Hold on- hold on- I believe they're gonna be impounding it and you can retrieve it from Metro.
Me: Do you mind if I ask why they're impounding it?
OSG2: That's up to them. That's not- That's not on us.
UC: Stay right there. The other girl has it. She went to go get her car.
Me: Ok.
Jon: There she is.
Me: Ok.
LC: (In background to UC) Um, the dagger is, uh, I think we're going to impound that-
Me: How are you doing, Jon? (laughs)
Jon: Oh, not too bad. I don't know, you tell me. How are you doing? I talked to Jason. He's uh, heading back to the hotel and grabbing a cab. He's gonna meet us there. So-
Me: Ok. I'm very cold.
Jon: Do you need a jacket?
Me: No, I'm ok.
Jon: You sure?
Me: Yeah.
Jon: So, I didn't realize that you still have the car.
Me: I do indeed still have the car. He got a free taxi. I'm cold. It's really cold.
LC: Sir, the keys were left with your items there.
Me: Excuse me?
LC: The keys were left with your items there.
Me: Oh, ok. They've been seperated.
LC: Yeah.
Me: And, do you mind-
LC: (Holds up the kubotan in an evidence bag) This is going to be impounded as evidence.
Me: Evidence in what?
LC: As a dangerous weapon.
Me: Ok. Um, am I receiving a report or citation of any kind?
LC: Not at this time, but you can go ahead and get the event number with the sergeant's information and you can go ahead and call that in.
Me: Am I being charged with any crime?
LC: You are not being charged with any crime, no. That's right.
Me: Ok, but you're seizing my property.
LC: As evidence, that's correct.
Me: As evidence against no crime?
LC: No. What we do is we impound that evidence and uh, we do it for safekeeping, and we can use it as a potential charge because we can charge you with possession of a dangerous weapon. So, possession of a dangerous weapon could be the crime against you, however you're being released. Now, if you're caught again, and this is, you know, affiliated with your information, we can go ahead and arrest you for that, ok?
Me: Now-
LC: If we find any other dangerous weapons, because that's just establishing precedent for you carrying dangerous weapons. That's it.
Me: And you're telling me that- that a piece of plastic qualifies as a dangerous weapon?
LC: The dagger thing?
Me: It's not a dagger, it's a kubotan. It's- it's a kubotan. It is sold-
LC: Well, you'd have to talk to the sergeant about that.
Me: It's sold to women as a self-defense item.
LC: Ok, well, you'll have to talk to the sergeant.
Me: Do you mind if I receive some sort of receipt for my property?
LC: Actually, we're gonna go ahead and not do that right now, but we will-
Me: You're not gonna do that? You're seizing my property against no crime-
LC: We're seizing the property. We're seizing the property. There is a crime. It will be possession of a dangerous weapon. Would you like to go to jail for that?
Me: No, I would not.
LC: Our sergeant is releasing you for this.
Me: Ok. All- all I'm asking for is a receipt.
LC: Not at this time, but you can get it through the event number. You will be able to obtain that.
Me: Ok.
Jon: The way the sergeant explained it to me is that he's letting you skate on any potential gross misdemeanor and-
Me: I have- I, however, have-
OSG: They didn't say that you couldn't retrieve it. They just said that you have to-
Me: As long as I can get someone's information. I now have no names of any of the officers involved, nor do I have any sort of citation or case report.
Jon: He has the badge number.
OSG: Actually, uh- Here, write this down.
Me: Can you hold this Jon for a second?
OSG: I'm gonna get you the event number, ok. I haven't gotten the event number yet. The sergeant there, his pin number is ****, ok.
Me: Sergeant number ****. No name though?
OSG: His last name is ********.
Me: Ok.
OSG: And I'll go get an event number for you, ok?
Me: Sure. Thank you.

Jon: Mike, I love ya, I know you're an attorney, but at the same time, just let it go. [Jon then does his best to convince me to just walk away from the scene ASAP before the police change their mind and charge me (rightly or wrongly) with a crime.]
OSG: Ok, Michael. The event number is **********. Yeah, you give that information to-
Me: So, I contact the Las Vegas Metro Police-
OSG: Yes, sir.
Me: -and I can receive a copy of any sort of incident report, or?
OSG: Yeah. I don't know- Like I said, I don't think they're doing anything, besides- I think they'll be an event. I think they put some kind of information in their computer with this, you understand what I'm saying?
Me: Ok.
OSG: But they didn't, like he said, they didn't process you for nothing. So, uh-
Me: Ok.
Jon: Do you have all your keys, though?
Me: Let me double check. [I look through all of my stuff.]
Jon: Let's walk.
Me: I believe I have everything. My ID, credit cards.
Jon: You did well, my man. You did good. You stood up for yourself.
Me: All right. I currently have all of my property, except for the kubotan.
Jon: And are we up? Are we up on the craps?
Me: A little bit.
Jon: Sir, thank you very much.
OSG: You know what? Like- like I said, from O'Shea's and Flamingo, you could probably go anywhere else-
Jon: In the Harrah's family?
OSG: Yeah, and like I said, unless you do anything criminal- I really wouldn't advise continuing to carry the holster-
Me: Correct.
OSG: -cause you'll get approached again and they'll ask you for your ID and if they run your name they're gonna retrespass you from-
Me: Is there a statute of limitations or is it just perpetual?
OSG: Usually about a year.
Me: A year?
OSG: Trespass is about a year. Usually that's what we run. Like I say, if something rehappens again, we redo the trespass. You could come back let's say in a couple of weeks again and we'll just retrespass you again. You see what I'm saying?
Me: Ok.
OSG: So, it does- it does allow us to arrest you for it.
Me: Ok. And, can I just get your name again? I don't know if I-
OSG: I, uh- I don't think-
Me: Just your first name.
OSG: *******.
Me: Ok, thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Jon: Take care. Stay warm.
Me: I know you're just doing your job. I thank you. I will promise to stay away from any of the-
OSG: I, I- You seem very kosher. I understand.
Me: All right. (To OSG2) Am I free to go?
OSG2: Oh, yeah, yeah. You're clear at this point.
Me: All right.
OSG: We're done Michael.
Me: I just want to double check with the officers. All right. (To OSG2) This is Sgt. ******* right here, in the middle?
OSG2: Yes.
Jon: Are we good to go?
Me: I just want to double check that we're good to go.
LC: You called it a kubotan?
Me: Yes, a kubotan. K-U-B-O-T-A-N. Yes, it is made out of molded plastic. It has a keyring on the end.
OSG: You ever watch, you ever watch MSNBC?
Me: Yes.
OSG: They had a prisoner make a- take a little coffee cup lid and melt it with, you know the little toilet paper thing?
Me: Yes.
OSG: And melt it into a sharp little object.
Me: I, I understand.
[One of the suspect's friends is still yelling at SJ and the other officers. The original suspect with the concealed firearm is now out of handcuffs and I believe he and the other friend have essentially been released without charge.]
OSG: You have a good night, Michael. I'm going back inside, ok?
Me: Thank you. Thank you very much. Have a good night..

Jon: You did good, Mike.
Me: I'll be good.
Jon: No, I said you did good. You look like you're about ready to turn into a popsicle.
Me: Well-
Jon: But it's a good idea to probably not have your hands in your pockets right now.
Me: It's cold. (Pause) Well, I assume that we're going straight back to the hotel, right?
Jon: Probably a good idea. Unless you wanna grab some grub?
Me: No.
LC: Do, do you need anything else, sir?
Jon: Are we all set?
Me: Am I free to go?
LC: You are all set.
Jon: Thank you so much.
LC: ****, did you get the last four of the event number, or no?
Me: Yes, yes I did.
LC: Good, ok.
Me: And I can contact the Las Vegas Metro Police Department?
LC: Absolutely. 828-3111 and uh, you can contact them and you can say they impounded evidence for possession of a dangerous weapon-
Me: Ok.
LC: -and, um, it was put in as evidence, so that's evidence. You can try to get that back. Uh, not very likely, but you know, potentially people will try. You can possibly get it back. Like I said, 828-3111
Me: All right. And I just contact the general number. There's no special-?
LC: 828-3111 is the general number.
Me: Ok.
LC: What you do is, when you contact that number, they'll go ahead and transfer you to wherever they need to transfer you. If you want to retrieve your evidence, they'll go ahead and put you through to the evidence vault and what not. Uh, like I said, I don't know if they're gonna possibly give that back to you, but-
SJ: (To Jon off to the side) Mike's not understanding that, I'm supposed to take him to jail right now. And he ain't- he ain't- he ain't feelin' that right now.
LC: -we're gonna impound that as evidence. And the crime would be possession of a dangerous weapon.
Me: Possession of a dangerous weapon.
LC: That's correct.
Me: Ok.
LC: Ok? And, that's something that you're not being charged with, but, you essentially can go to jail for this, but we're not arresting you. That's within our discretion. Ok?
Me: Ok.
LC: That's it.
Me: Ok. (Looking at LC's name tag) And your last name is ********?
LC: Yes.
Me: All right. Well-
LC: I'm the impounding officer-
Me: Ok.
LC: -that's out sergeant-
Me: Ok.
LC: -and you can have everyone's name on the event list.
Me: Ok.
LC: They can give that to you, ok?
Me: That will appear?
LC: That will appear. Absolutely. Every person that was on this call will appear.
Me: Ok.
LC: Ok?
Me: Ok. Thank you very much.
LC: Thank you.
Me: All right.
LC: Thank you very much. I understand, like you said, you don't want to talk this further; I understand the two of you have your rights, we have our procedures that we follow, you know, we have to follow the law according to the Nevada statutes of, uh- Nevada Revised Statutes.
Me: Oh.
LC: So, go ahead and look that up also, ok?
Me: I sure will.
Jon: Thank you.
LC: Ok, thank you.
[Jon and I now start to walk away from the scene in the direction of SJ who is talking with one of O'Shea's security guards.]
Me: Excuse me, Sgt. *******?
SJ: Yep.
Me: Hi. (I extend my hand out and shake SJ's hand) Uh, I just want to say I, uh, appreciate the work you guys do-
SJ: No problem.
Me: -I know that, you guys have a tough job.
SJ: You see what I'm talking about, with the gun thing?
Me: I, I understand, but I still say that I'm going to enforce my rights for freedom of speech.
SJ: Nobody's- nobody's gonna stop you. Nobody said you couldn't say anything. You can say anything you want. That's the freedom of speech-
Me: Well-
SJ: (Pointing towards my holster) -that's the freedom of expression.
Me: Understandably though, you claim I'm going to be stopped everytime I come on The Strip.
SJ: And you will. This guy right here, that had this gun right here, he's legal to have his gun, but you've just seen what it created in the bathroom when he passed out, and his gun comes flying out, and everybody sees it. It creates drama. In this day and age, when everybody is waiting on someone to walk into a casino and kill a bunch of people- You have the right- you have the right to walk around here in Nevada, if- (pauses) if you're a resident here with a gun in the holster out in the open just like the old Wild Wild West. However, everytime you do that, you're gonna draw attention. People are gonna call it in and go, "There's a guy walking down the street with a gun." And we're not just gonna go...

[Unfortunately, it's at this moment that my digital voice recorder runs out of battery time, so I missed the last two minutes or so of my conversation with SJ. To sum up, he claimed that though it was legal, someone OCing on The Strip is completely out of the ordinary and when the call comes in, they'll detain the subject everytime because they (the police) fear that anyone with a gun is only there with one purpose - to initiate a mass execution in one of the casinos. SJ had a very "us vs. them" attitude for a LEO. He gave me the following example: if I (Mike) was allowed to have my gun out in the open at the craps table and I just lost $200, I'd now be angry and since I had a firearm at the ready, I wouldn't be able to help myself from just "blasting away" at everyone. I politely reminded him that such use of a firearm would be a criminal act, that 99%+ of gun owners would not do such a thing, and his argument is really one against any citizen being able to possess any firearms. I told him that having a "Gun Free Zone" is much more likely to endanger my life and the lives of those around me. Also, back home in Arizona, I OC absolutely everywhere I go and no one, especially the police, even give me a second look. I reiterated how I was going to enforce my rights and continue to OC the next time I came to Las Vegas. I then thanked him for listening to me and wished him a happy New Year. All in all, the officers of the LVMPD acted in a professional and courteous manner during this incident. However, I still believe that they had no legitimate "reasonable suspicion" to initiate a Terry Stop, nor do I believe that they had the authority to seize my kubotan as a "dangerous weapon." What does everyone else think?]

[Edit: I redacted the relevant NRS sections.]

Maybe next time you should leave the holster at home, wear a t-shirt that says "I support the second amendment" and not carry the dagger.

Quote: s2dbaker

Maybe next time you should leave the holster at home, wear a t-shirt that says "I support the second amendment" and not carry the dagger.

My sentiments exactly. This could have ended with a beat down and a night in jail especially with Metro. Wearing an empty holster just seems silly to me.

Quote: s2dbaker

Maybe next time you should leave the holster at home, wear a t-shirt that says "I support the second amendment" and not carry the dagger.

Edit: the below was first written thinking that Teddy was "mr. holster" as the Wizard puts it. Pretty funny. I have changed pronouns now, and am not being so careful not to offend.

I think he is going to get a lot of reaction like this.

From my perspective: I have used guns for recreation and hunting for my entire lifetime. I have no inclination to side with gun control types, and obviously want to protect the use of firearms generally, so that what I do does not get taken away. I haven't gotten so worked up by the second amendment business though. I have not joined the NRA but have reserved that as an option if it ever appeared my use of guns was going to be threatened. So far, any such has not been seriously threatened. It looks like my life will be lived out that way, but I want to be wary to a degree.

[...] It's clear that security, the cops, and probably some patron or dealer over-reacted. However, it occurs to me that he should have realized there was a good possibility something like this would happen. I hope he took this into account and was willing to go through this. [...] having something on you that could be considered a weapon while wearing things that attracted attention, like handcuffs and empty holsters, was a good way to get that taken away. "The Judge" is not going to sympathize with "Mr. Holster".

At least they didn't find the little derringer that you had hidden in your belt buckle. That would have been really bad.

Also, if you're going to be carrying around an empty holster with a hidden pistol in your belt buckle, you shouldn't be carrying around pictures of youngish looking girls on your cell phone.

Btw, did they find the crack you had hidden in your socks?

Next time, just run, dude. Run fast.

In my opinion, the holster guy was escalating the situation just as much as the police, if not more. When it comes to the LVPD, and many others, it isn't the best idea to push your rights to the limit and expect no consequences. The fact that Mr. holster had the foresight to record the whole thing shows me he was expecting a confrontation. I'm sure that wearing a holster in plain view passes for the norm in Arizona, but it just doesn't fly on the Las Vegas Strip, where nobody wants to scare away tourists.

For what it is worth, the way I was trained for my permit, and at Front Sight (a firearms school near Pahrump) was to blend into society, to be on the same side as the police department, and that an armed society is a polite society.

There are many legal things that are just not smart to do. Doing things that are not smart makes you not smart. Mr. Holster guy is not smart.

You should have reached into the empty holster and pretended to do a draw. That would have been sweet.

The way LV police greater holster guy is a primary reason why Las Vegas is falling behind to Macau.

You go get em, holster guy.

Seriously though, if the holster guy was an attorney he should know that reasonable suspicion is the lowest legal standard. The cops had more than enough reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop. And Terry v Ohio states that police may conduct a limited search for weapons.

Reasonable suspicion is even lower than probable cause, and probable cause is pretty darn low to begin with.

It takes very little for there to be reasonable suspicion. Holster guy loses. And yes, the confiscated item is arguably a dangerous weapon. The fact that it Ma be a defensive weapon is entirely irrelevant. Its still a weapon.

But, arguendo, assume holster guy had his 'rights' violated. He has no tort case because he has no damages (and you can't boot strap by saying that your damages were your violation of rights). Holster guy has no criminal remedies either because the remedy to unlawful search andand seizure is suppression of evidence. Here there is no criminal filing so there's no need for a criminal remedy.

Even if civilly holster guy had damages, because they lost his confiscated item (in most states, you need to get at least $1 in actual damages to qualify for punitive damages), no jury, especially in LV, is going to award much, if any punitive, for the above facts.

Maybe Im wrong. But i still say holster guy should have ran.

Quote: 1BB

My sentiments exactly. This could have ended with a beat down and a night in jail especially with Metro. Wearing an empty holster just seems silly to me.

I think we've all seen enough obnoxious drunk people in the gaming pit to understand that for the most part I feel safer without Batman and his pockets full of wonderful toys standing next to me - regardless of his clean record and non-violent tendancies.

This is purely a first amendment challenge. Since there were no actual weapons involved, except maybe the plastic dagger, the second amendment doesn't come into play. Since this is purely speech and expression, you have to analyze what threat level this action falls under. This isn't the same as shouting "FIRE" in a crowded theater nor is it the same as picketing a soldier's funeral because you don't like gay people. It's somewhere in between. Here's the facts:

1) Wearing an empty holster in a place where one is likely to encounter the drunk and belligerent ( O'Shea's? Seriously? )
2) Tacitly acknowledging that wearing an empty holster ( and shorts and a t-shirt? Seriously? ) is bound to collect some attention because..
3) Holster guy wore an audio recording device in anticipation of aforementioned attention.

There was a reasonable expectation of this kind of encounter with the PoPo and lo and behold, holster guy got exactly what he wanted.

Did he actively cause danger to the people around him by threatening people or causing a panic? No
Did he draw attention to his cause by wearing an outlandish costume like a tri-cornered hat with teabags attached? No.
Did he passively cause danger to people around him by wearing a device whose main purpose is to hold a hand gun? Possibly.

The drunk in the bathroom with the concealed weapon may have been dealt with differently had security not been distracted by the intentional display of a holster with a missing weapon. I think the people in charge of security have a right to know if the weapon is missing by design or by accident. The empty holster was not stuffed with lollipops or some other indication that the device was meant to be empty or not used for its intended purpose. Perhaps a casino is not the best place for said expression of support for one's cause.

I consider this a fail. If one feels that strongly about a cause, pop up a tent in a park and start handing out fliers.

What a great story! I'm 100% with the cops on
this one, they should have done more. You want
to make a stupid 'statement', this is what you get.
Cops, with good reason, have zero tolerance for
stuff like this, can you blame them? Its exactly
like the high school kid who wears a T-shirt with
an upraised middle finger on it and says he's
making a 'statement' when he gets kicked out
of school.

I had an old cab dispatcher when I had the cab
company who, when some driver didn't like a
run he was given, would say over the radio 'F**k
you, Don!' And Don would laugh and say to me
'Nope, he can't f**k me, but I sure as hell can
f**k him.' And the driver would get every crappy
run he had for the rest of the night.

The lesson being, never screw with people who
can screw with you back 3 times as hard. Its
what little kids who don't know any better do.

Quote: s2dbaker

The drunk in the bathroom with the concealed weapon may have been dealt with differently had security not been distracted by the intentional display of a holster with a missing weapon.

There was an episode of COPS on years ago where
a cop stopped a teen black kid who was wearing
an empty shoulder holster, and got treated just like
the Vegas guy. The cop told him that he see's a
holster and he thinks the guy has a gun and the guy
ends up dead. A really stupid thing to do.

I got searched by security in Main Street... I was wearing my normal "Police Line, Don't Cross" bag, and asked if I was carrying a weapon as the bag "made me look like I might be a police officer".

They check my bag and pockets quickly, but the accent gave it away I was just a tourist. I found the whole thing kinda funny though.

Quote: thecesspit

. I was wearing my normal "Police Line, Don't Cross" bag,

You were wearing a bag? Isn't that odd?

It's a satchel/messenger bag (man purse if you like) :



I carry it most places to keep my stuff in (iPad, phone, camera etc).

If this individual had been a "Whale" I think the casino would let him wear whatever the hell he wanted.

Quote: cono

If this individual had been a "Whale" I think the casino would let him wear whatever the hell he wanted.

Are there any whales at O'Shea's?

Quote: cono

If this individual had been a "Whale" I think the casino would let him wear whatever the hell he wanted.

The casino would also already know the whale.

I love these second amendment types who think they are so politically oppressed that they have to make a statement.
Guess what fool. Your second amendment rights end when you are on private property. Welcome to America.

Quote: WongBo

I love these second amendment types who think they are so politically oppressed that they have to make a statement.
Guess what fool. Your second amendment rights end when you are on private property. Welcome to America.

While I understand your sentiment you can't class anyone on the actions of this idiot the op is posting about.

Your second amendment rights extend beyond private property. Don't know where you thought up the opposite.

Federal courts have upheld the rights of corporations to forbid their workers and visitors to carry firearms.
The second amendment is a proscription against government abuse, not against property rights.
See paragraph 7...


Legal Theory of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Copyright © 1994 Constitution Society. Permission is granted to copy with attribution for noncommercial purposes.

There is considerable confusion about the legal theory underlying the "right to keep and bear arms". This is a brief outline for a clarification of the discussion of this issue.

(1) The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not establish the right to keep and bear arms. None of the provisions of the Constitution establish any "natural" rights. They recognize such rights, but the repeal of such provisions would not end such rights. Such rights were considered by many of the Framers as obvious or "self-evident", but they were immersed in the prevailing republican thought of the day, as expressed in the writings of Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Madison, Hamilton, and others, which discussed "natural rights" in some detail. Others argued that at least some of the rights needed to be made explicit in the Bill of Rights to avoid having future generations with less understanding of republican theory weaken in their defense of those rights. That has turned out to have been a good idea.

(2) The right to keep and bear arms is a natural right of individuals under the theory of democratic government. This was clearly the understanding and intent of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution and was a long-established principle of English common law at the time the Constitution was adopted, which is considered to be a part of constitutional law for purposes of interpreting the written Constitution.

(3) What the Second Amendment also does is recognize the right, power, and duty of able-bodied persons (originally males, but now females also) to organize into militias and defend the state. It effectively recognizes that all citizens have military and police powers, and the "able-bodied" ones -- the militia -- also have military and police duties, whether exercised in an organized manner or individually in a crisis. "Able-bodied" is a term of art established by English common law at the time the Constitution was adopted, and is the only qualification besides citizenship on what constitutes the "militia". While not well defined in modern terms, it is somewhat broader than just able-"bodied": implicit is also "able-minded" and "virtuous". In other words, persons might be excluded who were physically able to bear arms but who were mentally or morally defective. Defense of the "state" includes self-defense and defense of one's family and friends who are, after all, part of the state, but by establishing the defense of the state as primary a basis is laid for requiring a citizen to risk or sacrifice his life in defense of the state and is thus a qualification on the implicit right of self-defense, which is considered to prevail in situations in which self-sacrifice is not called for.

(4) The U.S. Constitution does not adequately define "arms". When it was adopted, "arms" included muzzle-loaded muskets and pistols, swords, knives, bows with arrows, and spears. However, a common- law definition would be "light infantry weapons which can be carried and used, together with ammunition, by a single militiaman, functionally equivalent to those commonly used by infantrymen in land warfare." That certainly includes modern rifles and handguns, full-auto machine guns and shotguns, grenade and grenade launchers, flares, smoke, tear gas, incendiary rounds, and anti-tank weapons, but not heavy artillery, rockets, or bombs, or lethal chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. Somewhere in between we need to draw the line. The standard has to be that "arms" includes weapons which would enable citizens to effectively resist government tyranny, but the precise line will be drawn politically rather than constitutionally. The rule should be that "arms" includes all light infantry weapons that do not cause mass destruction. If we follow the rule that personal rights should be interpreted broadly and governmental powers narrowly, which was the intention of the Framers, instead of the reverse, then "arms" must be interpreted broadly.

(5) The right to keep and bear arms does indeed extend to the states. As do the other rights recognized by other Amendments, and as reinforced by the Fourteenth Amendment. It is not just a restriction on the powers of the central government. On the other hand, the citizens of a state can adopt a constitution that might restrict the exercise of such rights by delegating the power to do so to the state government. However, if the restriction of natural rights is unduly burdensome on those rights, then such a provision would be incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, its guarantee of the rights, and its guarantee that all states have a "republican" form of government - which such restrictions would compromise.

(6) The legal basis for a government not infringing on the right to keep and bear arms is not constitutional provisions like the Second Amendment, but that the power to do so is not one of the enumerated powers delegated to the government, whether Union or State. That delegation must be explicit as pertains to arms. They can't be regulated on the basis of general powers to tax or to regulate commerce. Arms have a special status under constitutional law. Some State constitutions may delegate such powers to the State government. The U.S. Constitution does not delegate such powers to the Union government. No powers are delegated to government by the preamble to a constitution, which is only a statement of purpose, only by provisions in the body of the document and its amendments.

(7) The legal basis on which the states can regulate arms is in those situations in which they conflict with property rights. It is a fundamental principal in law that the owners or managers of real property have the power to regulate who may enter their premises, and to set conditions upon their entry. That includes public property. Citizens have a right to keep and bear arms -- on their own property or property they control -- but not on someone else's property without his permission.

(8) In other words, citizens have a right to keep and bear arms in those places and situations where they have a right to be, unless such rights are disabled by due process of law. Fundamental natural rights can never be lost, as contractual rights can be, only the exercise of those rights restricted or "disabled", to use the legal term. The distinction is very important. Natural rights are those which the individual brings with him when he enters into the social contract, and reclaims if the social contract is broken. The right to keep and bear arms is such a natural right, as is the right of free speech, religious belief, and privacy. The alternative is a contractual right created by a contract, such as the social contract. The right to vote or to be judged by a jury of one's peers are examples of rights created by the social contract, albeit important ones that are also constitutionally protected. Because they are constitutionally protected, it is only proper to speak of them as disabled, rather than lost, so long as the subject remains a citizen or natural person, depending on whether it is a right of citizenship or personhood.

(9) It is unconstitutional to "disable" any rights by statute except one set: the rights of majority. The disabilities of minority do not need to be established by a court trial or hearing. However, they can be removed sooner than they would be removed by constitution or statute, by reaching a certain age. This means it is unconstitutional to disable the right to keep and bear arms to a class of persons by statute, including those, such as felons, who have been the subject of due process on another issue, except through a proceeding in which the court is explicitly petitioned to disable them, the subject has an opportunity to argue to the contrary, the petitioner has the burden of proof that the subject if armed would be a threat to himself or others, and the court grants that petition. Merely being convicted of a crime, or declared mentally incompetent, is not sufficient if the language of the judgement does not also explicitly disable the right to keep and bear arms, or set restrictions on such right.

(10) "General police powers" is not a constitutional basis for states or localities to regulate arms. "General police powers" are the powers to use the means necessary and sufficient to stop someone who threatens to commit a major crime, or to arrest someone who has done so. All citizens have such power. They differ from regular, professional police only in that the regular police also have "special police powers" in matters such as minor offenses, and in that they outrank civilians. Since citizens have general police powers, they also have the right to such means as they require to exercise such powers in situations in which they may be called upon to do so. That includes arms.

(11) To be constitutional, state laws restricting the bearing of arms must distinguish between public property, private commercial property which serves the public and which therefore confers certain rights to the public, and other private property with no public access rights. It is reasonable and constitutional to prohibit persons from bearing arms onto purely private property without notifying the owner or manager and obtaining his or her permission, except over public easements, such as sidewalks or the walkway from the street to the front door. On the other hand, it would be an undue burden on the right to bear arms to forbid persons from traveling between places where they have a right to be, and to bear arms while they do so, along public pathways or private easements, and using their own or a public means of transportation. It may not, however, be an undue burden to prohibit the bearing of arms onto certain public property where persons do not have unrestricted access, such as office buildings and auditoriums, provided that authorities guarantee the safety of persons who enter unarmed. Owners of commercial property serving the public which confers some rights of access to the public may prohibit the bearing of arms by posting or giving a notice to that effect, but lacking such notice, bearing arms onto the premises would be permitted. The rule must be that laws must not burden the right to bear arms except to the extent that they would impose a greater burden on the right of property owners to exclude persons bearing arms.

(12) The law must presume that places of business that cater to arms, such as gun shops and shooting ranges, and events such as gun shows, offer presumptive permission to bear arms and that therefore it is not illegal to bear them there or to travel to and from them.

(13) A carry permit system essentially is a removal of restrictions against bearing arms on public and private property unless there is an express prohibition against doing so, either in the form of a posted sign or a directive from the owner or his agent. The rationale for issuing such permits is to equip persons of good character to more effectively function as militiamen or police in situations in which regular police are not available or insufficient. That also includes self-protection, but the key factor is the duty to perform police duties as necessary. There also needs to be explicit statutory protection of the state or other permit issuing authority against criminal or civil liability for any acts done by the permit holder. One kind of carry permit is that which is one of the "special police powers" of regular law-enforcement officers, which allows them to carry anywhere, even against the express wishes of a property owner.

(14) With the high levels of crime we now endure, the only effective way to extend police protection to a level that might deter crime is to recruit a substantial proportion of the public to go armed, by issuing them carry permits, offering them police training, and organizing them into a network of militia units closely coordinated with regular law enforcement agencies. It is likely that as many as 25% of the adult public could serve in this way on a regular basis, and another 25% on an occasional basis, and that if they did, we might expect it to have a significant positive impact on crime. Some such citizens might even be granted higher police rank, and perform regular police duties on a part-time basis. Such involvement of the public in law enforcement would also have other benefits: breaking down the social and psychological barriers that now separate the regular police from civilians, and deterring some of the abuses of authority that police have sometimes fallen into.

(15) That the militia should be "well-regulated" is not a basis for restricting the keeping or bearing of arms. The term originally meant "self-regulated" and militias could be independent of state or national authority if not called up by such authority. Militia members may be required to carry certain standard arms during formations, but they cannot be forbidden from carrying additional arms of their own unless doing so would impair normal militia operations. State-appointed officers may direct when, where and in what manner members of the militia are to train and perform their duties, but may not forbid them to meet on their own.

(16) The Union government has the power, under the U.S. Constitution, to regulate imports and interstate commerce in arms, but the Framers would not agree with how the "interstate commerce" clause (Art. 1, Sec. 8) of the Constitution has been broadly interpreted to include regulation of manufacture, possession, and local sales and use of items. A strict constitutional interpretation requires that the Union government has authority only over transactions that cross state lines, and not over actions or transactions that occur within state borders, even if they involve items that may someday cross state borders or may have once done so. If we want the Union government to have such authority, and a good case can be made for that, then the U.S. Constitution needs to be amended to delegate that authority to it.

(17) The Union government also has excise taxing power, but since arms have special status under the Constitution, no tax may be levied that imposes an undue burden on the right to keep and bear arms. Rights are more fundamental than taxing powers, particularly since the right to keep and bear arms is recognized in an amendment which supersedes any prior provisions that conflict with it, which includes all taxing powers except the income tax (which does not provide a basis for taxing arms). Arms may be taxed as general merchandise is, such as with a sales tax, but any tax law which specifies arms for special taxes, other than reasonable use fees for public services related to them, must be considered unconstitutional. That would include taxes on ammunition and the ingredients to make it. The analogy is to taxes on newsprint, which may be taxed like other merchandise, but not in a way that would impose an undue burden on the right of a free press.

(18) This means that no government has the power, unless that power is specifically granted to it under its constitution, to prohibit any person from manufacturing or possessing any gun or ammunition for it on his own premises or where he has a right to be, or against using it in a safe and responsible manner, or against selling or giving it to another person within the borders of a state.

(19) Since the common law prevailing at the time the Constitution was adopted defined "militia" to consist of "able-bodied" citizens, including persons younger than the usual age of majority, any law restricting the possession, sale or gift of guns or ammunition to persons under the age of majority or any other particular age, or to minors (since persons under the age of majority may have their disabilities of minority removed by a court), is also unconstitutional, unless the constitution explicitly includes a disability of the right to keep and bear arms among the disabilities of minority. The proper test for being "able-bodied" must involve meeting certain standards that are independent of age, such as skill, judgement, and level of maturity. It is possible for persons to be "able-bodied" at quite a young age, and the law must recognize that competence where it exists. All citizens above the age of majority would have to be presumed able- bodied unless they or the state petitioned a court to rule otherwise and it granted the petition. However, it would be constitutional to require a reasonable test of competence to citizens below the age of majority, and to issue credentials to those qualifying which they would be required to show when answering calls of the militia or, if the right to keep and bear arms were included among the rights disabled by minority, when bearing arms. Early removal of the disabilities of minority would then also remove the disabilities of the right to keep and bear arms.

(20) The "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution requires that persons issued a carry permit by one state must have that permit recognized in other states. This suggests a uniform standard for qualifying persons for issuance.

REFERENCE: Stephen P. Halbrook, That Every Man be Armed, available from The Independent Institute, 134 98th Av, Oakland, CA 94603, 510/568-6047.

2900 W. Anderson Lane #C-200-322 Austin, TX 78757 512-299-5001
Home » Founding Documents
Original URL: http://www.constitution.org/leglrkba.htm
Maintained: of the Constitution Society
Original date: xxxx/xx/xx — 

Ok on the whole I agree with the OP, but the fault lies with the casino. At most, the casino should have used the police to make sure that he was escorted off the property. After they searched you they should have let you go with your kubotan thingy.

On the other hand, I spent a good amount of time in college within the conservative political circles and know what kind of d-bags these Ron Paul types (whether you are actually a supporter I can't say for sure, but from your transcript you definitely came off that way) so I'm not going to be overly angry with the police. I'm not sure if anyone remembers Rand Paul's problem at the airport a month ago, but these people intentionally push every single button possible to make the police go after them.

Just to be clear, I support concealed carry everywhere including on university campuses - but will readily admit my kin be really be dicks sometimes.

You wanted attention. You got attention.

Carry your gun.

Quote: WongBo

Federal courts have upheld the rights of corporations to forbid their workers and visitors to carry firearms.
 

Nothing new. Just like any private company can refuse service, they can basically trespass anyone for just about any reason.

The guy in the story is an absolute tool and attention getter, and DOES NOT represent the majority of 2nd amendment supporters.

Agree

Quote: klimate10

Seriously though, if the holster guy was an attorney he should know that reasonable suspicion is the lowest legal standard. The cops had more than enough reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop. And Terry v Ohio states that police may conduct a limited search for weapons.

Reasonable suspicion is even lower than probable cause, and probable cause is pretty darn low to begin with.

It takes very little for there to be reasonable suspicion. Holster guy loses. And yes, the confiscated item is arguably a dangerous weapon. The fact that it Ma be a defensive weapon is entirely irrelevant. Its still a weapon.

But, arguendo, assume holster guy had his 'rights' violated. He has no tort case because he has no damages (and you can't boot strap by saying that your damages were your violation of rights). Holster guy has no criminal remedies either because the remedy to unlawful search andand seizure is suppression of evidence. Here there is no criminal filing so there's no need for a criminal remedy.

Even if civilly holster guy had damages, because they lost his confiscated item (in most states, you need to get at least $1 in actual damages to qualify for punitive damages), no jury, especially in LV, is going to award much, if any punitive, for the above facts.

Maybe Im wrong. But i still say holster guy should have ran.

He can get a declaratory judgement. There just isn't much money in it.

Some observations:

- Those cops clearly do not know Nevada law regarding the possession and carry of 'dangerous weapons' and firearms.
- The holster guy should have just been carrying a gun in the holster. It is perfectly legal and others have done it. I carry everywhere when I am in Vegas.
- The casino clearly has the right to bar him from the property, and that includes because he was carrying a holster, gun, fake dagger, or anything else.
- I don't think there was reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop. Openly carrying a gun or knife is not illegal in Nevada and they have to have suspicion OF A CRIME. The trespass thing is possible, but that isn't a crime until he returns.
- The cops were morons for confiscating his property. Well beyond their rights.
- I am skeptical of police departments that routinely hassle people engaged in completely legal behavior.

Quote: Wizard

In my opinion, the holster guy was escalating the situation just as much as the police, if not more. When it comes to the LVPD, and many others, it isn't the best idea to push your rights to the limit and expect no consequences. The fact that Mr. holster had the foresight to record the whole thing shows me he was expecting a confrontation. I'm sure that wearing a holster in plain view passes for the norm in Arizona, but it just doesn't fly on the Las Vegas Strip, where nobody wants to scare away tourists.

For what it is worth, the way I was trained for my permit, and at Front Sight (a firearms school near Pahrump) was to blend into society, to be on the same side as the police department, and that an armed society is a polite society.

There are multiple philosophies. Front Sight is one of the 'sheepdog' schools that wants people to blend right in. No political activism, etc. Others support political activity and open carry to make a point, and a lot of these people refuse to get a permit because they don't think state governments should license and regulate something guaranteed by the federal constitution. For those people open carry is the only option, as concealed carry is illegal for non-permittees.

Open carry on the Las Vegas strip is completely legal. Sure, the guy is an attention whore, but it still bothers me that the police department thinks it is okay to hassle somebody because they don't like their completely lawful life choices.

Quote: bbvk05

but it still bothers me that the police department thinks it is okay to hassle somebody because they don't like their completely lawful life choices.

If you try to enter a casino with a tee shirt reading Stop Plate Tectonics they may hassle you but its unlikely to wind up with any acute lead poisoning taking place. However, an empty holster is likely to wind up with acute lead poisoning and discussions of completely lawful will be in the editorials and eulogies.

Quote: bbvk05

- I don't think there was reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop. Openly carrying a gun or knife is not illegal in Nevada and they have to have suspicion OF A CRIME. The trespass thing is possible, but that isn't a crime until he returns.

Correct.

Quote: FleaStiff

If you try to enter a casino with a tee shirt reading Stop Plate Tectonics they may hassle you but its unlikely to wind up with any acute lead poisoning taking place. However, an empty holster is likely to wind up with acute lead poisoning and discussions of completely lawful will be in the editorials and eulogies.

Sure, which is why the cops should at least know the laws they are enforcing. These CLEARLY didn't.

First of all...a declaratory judgment would do not any good here. Im not a Nevada lawyer, but based on what I know about most states and federal law, a declaratory judgment would probably be inapplicable here.

Secondly, there most definitely is reasonable suspicion. There may or may not be probable cause, but reasonable suspicion is most definitely arguable. The office must only justify something like this..."I, Mr. cop saw an empty holster, and guns usually are carried in holsters, therefore since there was no gun in the holster, I wanted to detain and search to make sure that the gun, that a person can assume goes with a holster, is not hidden on the person, and concealing a firearm on person is unlawful". I'm not saying that this logic is correct or incorrect. I'm saying that something like the above argument is all that is needed for reasonable suspicion, as reasonable suspicion is a very low standard.

Do not confuse reasonable suspicion with probable cause. The two are entirely judicially made up legal concepts, and are not defined by the common understanding of the English language. It is VERY hard to not have reasonable suspicion. There are a group of case law that states what can not be reasonable suspicion (ex. you can't use race, you can't use status, an example of a status that does not constitute reasonable suspicion would be, "I know that she is a known prostitute because she's been arrested before on prostitution, so I, Mr. Cop, am going to search her because she is standing on the corner". Now, if you add in the fact that she is dressed like a prostitute, that would probably be reasonable suspicion, and if you add the fact that she is talking to cars and drivers, as they stop, that's probable cause). Almost anything outside of those cases is reasonable suspicion.

Im not going to cite any case law to support the above argument. After all, I'm not giving legal advice here. Feel free to disagree.

These officers did an excellent job. They did not violate any protocol and did not violate any laws. Just because you don't agree with what the cops did, that doesn't mean that they did a bad job or that they did not know the law that they were enforcing.

Quote: bbvk05

but it still bothers me that the police department thinks it is okay to hassle somebody because they don't like their completely lawful life choices.

They only started hassling him after he started
acting like an ass. If he had just answered what
they asked, it would have been over in 2min. I
was parked in the fire zone next to Target a
couple years ago when a cop rolled up and told
me to move. I said my wife will be out any minute.
He said 'Are you refusing to move your vehicle?
I need to know before I impound it and call a tow
truck.' Don't mess with the police, they always
have the upper hand and they know it.

Quote: klimate10

Im not a Nevada lawyer....

That much is clear.

Quote:

Secondly, there most definitely is reasonable suspicion. The office must only justify something like this..."I, Mr. cop saw an empty holster, and guns usually are carried in holsters, therefore since there was no gun in the holster, I wanted to detain and search to make sure that the gun, that a person can assume goes with a holster, is not hidden on the person, and concealing a firearm on person is unlawful"

This reasoning is incorrect and has been struck down time and time again in circuit courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. Just because you "think" someone has a gun doesn't mean they are committing a crime, barring other circumstances (they are a felon, etc). That is not reasonable suspicion.

Quote:

I'm saying that something like the above argument is all that is needed for reasonable suspicion, as reasonable suspicion is a very low standard.

Sometimes it is low, other times it is not. In this case, there is no RS, and the example logic you gave is severely flawed.

Quote:

"I know that she is a known prostitute because she's been arrested before on prostitution, so I, Mr. Cop, am going to search her because she is standing on the corner". Now, if you add in the fact that she is dressed like a prostitute, that would probably be reasonable suspicion

Wrong. No RS here either. There needs to be some action other than just loitering. You can make it a social and talk to her. But dressing like a prostitute is not a crime nor indicative of a crime about to be committed even though you might think it is.

You made a valiant effort, but you must brush up on RS and terry stops. If you throw in some other variables, it may rise to the level of RS, but the above examples clearly lack enough information for a terry stop. If you need more info or clarification, just ask. :)

The police usually leave constitutional concerns to lawyers and judges.
If they see something that looks a little off, they will investigate.
They are not as concerned with your rights as you are.
Especially given the green light to ignore the constitution with the passage of the patriot act.
You can be searched at any time, anywhere, for no reason at all.
Especially if you are black, Hispanic, or middle eastern.
The threshold of reasonable suspicion does not exist.
You being in public is reasonable suspicion enough for you to be questioned and searched.
Resist and enjoy being cuffed, tasered or shot.

I really don't see why this is complicated:

Quote:

My clothing/attire consisted of the following:
SHORTS - six-pocket green cargo shorts carrying the following items:
- L thigh-pocket: C2 Taser w/ red laser sight; Fox Labs 4 oz. "Mean Green" pepper spray; small composite notebook; black ball-point pen
- L back-pocket: Ka-Bar TDI Model 1480 Law Enforcement Knife
The whole incident was recorded on an Olympus WS-331M digital voice recorder that was hanging around my neck underneath my T-shirt.
...
LC: Can I talk to you for a second?
Me: Yes?
LC: Do- do you have a weapon with you?
Me: No.

As far as I can tell, the OP lied to the police about carrying weapons (e.g. knife, taser), and he may also have violated state or federal laws regarding surreptitious recording and subsequent dissemination of oral communications. I think he got off easy.

Quote: WongBo

The police usually leave constitutional concerns to lawyers and judges.

This is an incorrect assumption. Police always have to have citizens' constitutional rights in mind for the integrity of any cases being investigated. If you really feel like this, than you are just jaded, or you live in a corrupted area which doesn't represent the majority of law enforcement.

Quote:

They are not as concerned with your rights as you are.

In some cases, they are concerned about people's rights more than the person themselves....

Quote:

Especially given the green light to ignore the constitution with the passage of the patriot act.

This doesn't even make sense. The patriot act doesn't eliminate any constitutional rights. Judges must still sign off on patriot act related warrants. Do some more research.

Quote:

You can be searched at any time, anywhere, for no reason at all.

False. Many people have brought successful lawsuits against police departments and other LE entities for 4th amendment issues.

Quote:

Especially if you are black, Hispanic, or middle eastern.

Also not true. Refer to my jaded comment in my first paragraph.

Quote:

The threshold of reasonable suspicion does not exist.

Not true.

Quote:

You being in public is reasonable suspicion enough for you to be questioned and searched.

Completely false. Again, lawsuits against agencies and other entities say otherwise. The police are generally more concerned about the 4th amendment than most people. Considering most people don't even fully understand the 4th amendment and related case-law.

Quote:

Resist and enjoy being cuffed, tasered or shot.

Fight your case in court, not on the street.

http://ccrjustice.org/files/CCR_Stop_and_Frisk_Fact_Sheet.pdf

Quote: WongBo

http://ccrjustice.org/files/CCR_Stop_and_Frisk_Fact_Sheet.pdf

And you and I both can agree the NYPD can do better than that.

Like I said, just citing one department, doesn't mean LE everywhere is like that. Stop and frisks are abused, I absolutely will agree on that. They shouldn't be. And officers that do abuse them should be held accountable, and they are held accountable as recent lawsuits and past lawsuits have shown.

I have lived in NYC for many years.
I don't leave here often enough except for day trips to casinos in NJ, PA, CT.
Perhaps I am a bit jaded and I forget that NY is not representative of the rest of the country.

Quote: WongBo

I have lived in NYC for many years.
I don't leave here often enough except for day trips to casinos in NJ, PA, CT.
Perhaps I am a bit jaded and I forget that NY is not representative of the rest of the country.

I can understand what you might have seen happen and why this reflects your viewpoint. I don't agree with some of the tactics the NYPD has employed in the past. Officers there have routinely been suspended, fired, and sued criminally and civilly for violations of both state and federal laws.

But on the whole, you can't just stop anyone for any reason. Welcome to lawsuit city. In fact, in some regions, some departments are so afraid of being sued, they don't stop people that they would've in the past, and sometimes that helps criminals. Weird effect. And also, some officers have been killed for being afraid of being sued. Very very sad.

Quote: WongBo

Perhaps I am a bit jaded and I forget that NY is not representative of the rest of the country.

Holy smoke did you say a mouthful. I visit NY every few years and
every time I'm there, after 24hrs I always say to whoever I'm with
"I can't believe people live here on purpose." I imagine you get used
to it and can't see what an utterly bizarre place it is, because you're
in the middle of it. Everybody is a hustler, everybody is on the make,
everybody is in your face with something. And the ones who aren't
are rude. I would go insane if I had to live there.

Most of the rude people you encounter here are from the rest of the country or other parts of the world.
New Yorkers are gracious and lovely people in general.

Quote: WongBo

Most of the rude people you encounter here are from the rest of the country or other parts of the world.
New Yorkers are gracious and lovely people in general.

But aren't New Yorkers, themselves, transplants from somewhere else? The whole melting pot theory?
Gotcha!

I grew up in Baltimore and lived for years in Houston and Denver. In all 3 cities I had many friend stopped frequently and even arrested for DWB.

My earliest ancestor came to New Amsterdam in 1618, so yes we are from somewhere else, I guess...:-)

Quote: buzzpaff

I grew up in Baltimore and lived for years in Houston and Denver. In all 3 cities I had many friend stopped frequently and even arrested for DWB.

They were "arrested" because they were black.....really?

Quote: WongBo

Most of the rude people you encounter here are from the rest of the country or other parts of the world.
New Yorkers are gracious and lovely people in general.

They must hide well cause I never meet them. All I see
are rude deli workers, rude wait people, rude cab drivers,
rude bartenders. People shoving knockoff watches and purses
and ties in my face. I was visiting an apartment with a friend
about 8 years ago and the guy said he paid $4K a month for
the 1100 sq ft apartment. After choking I said for $4K he could
buy a palace somewhere else. But it wouldn't be NY, he replied.
EXACTLY!

In case anyone is wondering, I split off the posts about which city is better New York or San Francisco to SF or NY.