Friday, June 18, 2010

Lafayette Memorial Debate on AB1934

Wow, it has been a long time. Unfortunately, not much has really been happening so I will spice things up a bit with a new blog post.

So I drove up to San Francisco to attend the debate between the Responsible Citizens of California , the Brady Campaign and Lori Saldana, the author of AB1934 (the "Anti-OC" bill) but due to extraneous circumstances (getting lost in San Francisco and dealing with the HORRENDOUS traffic), I was only able to catch the last 1/2 of the debate.

Despite the fact that I missed most of the debate (will catch up on the broadcast in a bit), I did have a few morsels of laughter at the expense of the police officers in Lafayette. Here is the story...

Since there is a school within 1000' of Lafayette Memorial Hall and I would be damned if I did not show up without a gun, I decided to LUCC (Locked Unloaded Concealed Carry) my Browning Hi-Power to the debate. The problem was that as I was about to enter the Lafayette Memorial Hall, I noticed that no ammunition was allowed in the building per building policy (must have been just for this event). Since I had a loaded magazine in my backpack and I didn't want to be in violation of building policy, I went to my car and put it away. Because of my honesty, I had to deal with two police officers before entering into the debate room. Here is a recording of my encounter with Lafayette PD and a member of Saldana's security detail.

A couple of things that I could have done better or should not have done at all.

1) I was tired from a whole day of dealing with San Francisco traffic and I let my guard down to procure some cheap, tired laughs (albeit internal laughs.) DON'T DO THAT! I should have NEVER offered info to those cops, even though I was completely in the legal clear. My shenanigans caused this conversation to be about 4x as long as it should have been.

2) Sam and I have discussed the usage of asking "Am I legally required to answer that question?" to an official and we are of the opinion that it is not really a good idea to ask that in a conversation, reason being that these cops probably don't know the law anyways so they will just automatically just say "Yes." In addition, it prolongs the conversation unnecessarily, which increases one's chances of tripping up, etc.

Instead, asking these three questions...

Am I under arrest?
Am I being detained?
Am I free to go?


...are your best phrases for getting out of dealing with the police.


3) I didn't get a name or badge number, that is no bueno. I must not forget to do that in the future.

On a side note, it was very funny to see these officers tracking my every movement inside of the debate room. If you look in this video at 2:18, you will see one of the officers that I dealt with standing directly behind me. He apparently had his hand on his gun for a good portion of the time as well. Seems like that may be brandishing but then again...

Sam and I REALLY need to start making some more videos to expound on the BUSTED video (a MUST SEE and an EXCELLENT primer to your Constitutional rights.) I will get on him about that next week.

Chicago v. McDonald is coming out within 11 days. Keep your fingers crossed and get ready for a wild ride.

CARRY ON!

-N8

5 comments:

grammaton76 said...

You did pretty good in the encounter, but let the word "bullshit" out near the end, and it almost raised the guy's hackles enough to pursue matters further.

Gotta remember to leave out the cussing around police - most of the folks who cuss around them are the ones who end up in cuffs. The folks they don't need to talk to, generally don't get worked up enough to cuss.

I will observe that the officer was clever though, trying to find out which car was there - it would've justified a 12031(e) check of the car had you answered yes.

Kevlar said...

Good point about asking, "Am I required to answer that question?" I've never heard an officer answer "no" to that even though the answer has always been "no".

I'm still waiting to hear a recording of an individual remaining completely silent while the officers talk to themselves.

TrackerPacker said...

Ask and ye shall receive, good Kevlar :)

James said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
James said...

This makes me ill. Where do I start?

1) The "I'm-a-2nd-Amendment-Guy-But-I-Don't-Care" is a liar or just plain stupid. Frankly, I suspect the former... that he's a plant or trying to be a clever. Sort of like the "seminar callers" that call talk shows and say inane stuff like "I'm a Republican, but I support Obama."

2) From what I understand they have NEVER produced any data that there's any increased risk to the public from open carry. There's simply no basis for that assertion. Before the government takes a RIGHT away, the burden of proof that there's a demonstrable and compelling public safety need should be on them.

3) Saldana is full of crap about having to have heightened security. What she's trying to imply is that those "crazy right wingers" are out to get her. Of course they aren't, but it's just a cynical manipulation just as her testifying before the Assembly public safety committee wearing a bullet proof vest just to play on emotion rather than bother with any sort of factual data.

Facts don't matter at all to these people... it's about control. Also she's from San Diego as well all know. This is "payback" for having the nerve to exercise our rights in a state where the legislature is dominated by democrats. Good thing they're on top of this, rather than dealing with the economy. It would be a thrill if they had the balls to take on the unions that run this state-- but that would be actually doing something substantial.