TexasCHLforum.com

I just came across this video which apparently occurred two days ago in Houston. I'm not a lawyer, but I think some laws might have been violated by the police officer(s).

[youtube][/youtube]

I am not the type to carry about an AR-15 just because, but I do not like their LEO reactions at all. I would be interested to know what laws if any were violated here.

It appears at the very least they are making up some bull on 'Failure to Identify' - which by my reading at no point requires a physical ID nor giving of any information when only detained (vs arrested).

If I want to, I can walk around without I.D. I'm not required to have I.D. if I'm simply walking about.

This country doesn't operate like the Gestapo.

I'm almost 100% Pro-LEO, but this attitude of: Show me your papers is not American, it's German police state Gestapo like...

P.S. I couldn't tell from the video if the guy is one of those "look at me, cuz I don't get enough attention types" if he is, I have no sympathy for him, but he doesn't have to carry papers to walk around in the U.S.

Some LEO's don't get this. The LEO in the (mostly audio) sounded outraged the guy didn't carry his "papers".

Wrong.

If I want to walk my dog without I.D. and an LEO rolls up and demands I furnish him my I.D. "I AM NOT REQUIRED TO" and he can go to Hades.

Don't they teach this simple American freedom in the various police academies?

Or, do they teach the officer to use a menacing glare and demand: "Your papers now, schweinhund"?

Whereupon, you're supposed to cringe into compliance and dig frantically for your Drivers License or whatever...?

Abraham wrote:If I want to, I can walk around without I.D. I'm not required to have I.D. if I'm simply walking about.

This country doesn't operate like the Gestapo.

I'm almost 100% Pro-LEO, but this attitude of: Show me your papers is not American, it's German police state Gestapo like...

P.S. I couldn't tell from the video if the guy is one of those "look at me, cuz I don't get enough attention types" if he is, I have no sympathy for him, but he doesn't have to carry papers to walk around in the U.S.

Some LEO's don't get this. The LEO in the (mostly audio) sounded outraged the guy didn't carry his "papers".

Wrong.

If I want to walk my dog without I.D. and an LEO rolls up and demands I furnish him my I.D. "I AM NOT REQUIRED TO" and he can go to Hades.

Don't they teach this simple American freedom in the various police academies?

Or, do they teach the officer to use a menacing glare and demand: "Your papers now, schweinhund"?

Whereupon, you're supposed to cringe into compliance and dig frantically for your Drivers License or whatever...?

If you are carrying concealed you are leaglly required to show your ID and CHL, even though there is no penalty.

Perhaps the most disgusting thing in the video is the cop trying to, or threatening to delete the video.

The guy needs to brush up on the 1st and 2nd Amendments, as well as the 4th.

mr1337 wrote:Perhaps the most disgusting thing in the video is the cop trying to, or threatening to delete the video.

The guy needs to brush up on the 1st and 2nd Amendments, as well as the 4th.

Its only a threat if he can't do it. Thats why the new body cameras have to be immune to this. Its my understanding that, in some departments having issues, obtaining camera footage of an event is difficult because often the camera was never turned...not functioning, etc.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

mr1337 wrote:Perhaps the most disgusting thing in the video is the cop trying to, or threatening to delete the video.

The guy needs to brush up on the 1st and 2nd Amendments, as well as the 4th.

Its only a threat if he can't do it. Thats why the new body cameras have to be immune to this. Its my understanding that, in some departments having issues, obtaining camera footage of an event is difficult because often the camera was never turned...not functioning, etc.

"Not functioning" (emphasis on the quotes)

Keith B,

I was speaking of simply walking about - not carrying.

That said: I don't have to "have to have my papers" I.D.ing me.

Somehow, LEO's have this general idea that we as Americans can be demanded to show proof of who we are - we don't.

Driving a vehicle, carrying a gun and other circumstances yes.

For simply walking about - NO!

We don't live in a police state yet...

Cedar Park Dad wrote: immune to this. Its my understanding that, in some departments having issues, obtaining camera footage of an event is difficult because often the camera was never turned...not functioning, etc.

Some jurisdictions have had great success. Others suffer from technical problems and missing video. I suspect it's related to how much discipline is applied in cases where videos go missing.

I don't like these interactions at all, however, It think there is bad behavior on both sides.
1) It's legal to carry an AR.
2) It's legal to lie and demand identification. It's legal to threaten arrest. It's legal to threaten to delete video.

Until someone steps up to the plate in terms of acting like a responsible adult, it's hard just to criticize just the LEO side.

A citizen keeping and bearing arms is not bad behavior.

A thug in uniform intimidating citizens is bad behavior.

I never liked that they can lie to us, but we're committing a crime if we lie.
my wife jogs. She got stopped to stand and deliver papers once. She's Latina. I tried to get her to point him out for about a week. She said she couldn't be sure and it didn't happen again.

Things are getting out of hand to my way of thinking. I blame the judicial branch.

OlBill wrote:I never liked that they can lie to us, but we're committing a crime if we lie.
my wife jogs. She got stopped to stand and deliver papers once. She's Latina. I tried to get her to point him out for about a week. She said she couldn't be sure and it didn't happen again.

Things are getting out of hand to my way of thinking. I blame the judicial branch.

It's a crime to give false info. It isn't a crime to lie to State or local cops just feds and you don't have to talk to them anyway. Besides in theory you are not lying to an individual when you lie to a cop. You are lying to an agent of the state, a public servant, who is conducting the people's business.

Also lets.not get to worked up and spend this to far around. The person in the video even said that he picked Houston because of the good nature of his contacts with the cops. Here he got a bad, or ignorant, officer. If you do see yourself as some kind of civil rights protester and that is the worst thing that happens to you then you are doing good.

Minor technical correction, EEllis. It is a crime to lie to state, county, or local officers IF it is about something that is material to their investigation (a very gray term). It is covered under PC 37.08 False Report to a Peace Officer. It is also illegal to lie about your name, date of birth, or home address to a police officer if you are a suspect or witness to a crime. You do not have to answer at all, but you may not lie about it. That is in 38.02 Failure to ID, which it is obvious that HPD does not know very well. I honestly thought HPD had learned their lesson about making sure their officers understood about the failure to ID laws after the incident a while back when a federal judge got arrested for failure to ID while jogging around his neighborhood.

To those who are wondering what laws were broken, I would guess that a complaint of official oppression (PC 39.03) and tampering with physical evidence (PC 37.09) would be the most likely charges to succeed, though there are problems with both charges. And, of course, federal civil rights charges could also be filed. I doubt anyone will file any charges against the officers though an IA complaint is probably a safe bet.

On the other hand, I am not impressed with the intelligence and tactics of the OC protestor. If he has run into that officer before and been mistreated then (or warned by the officer), I would say it is not smart to OC and protest in that area again. Not illegal, just not smart. Also, just in case anyone here is ever in that kind of situation, I suggest that you do identify verbally when asked for ID. You do not have to, but if the officer asks for ID and you answer by giving your name, DOB, and home address, it certainly helps defuse any possible charges of failure to ID.

OCing guy did nothing wrong. He didn't go into Starbucks, didn't go to chili's, didn't go anywhere, didn't scare or threaten anyone. What tactics where wrong here? Nothin'. He was respectful, complied, didn't attack officers. I think he did an outstanding job.

sounded like the cops had a grudge. Seen this OCing guy before.

Now this is going a little too borderline/ far. Lets not start bashing LEO's, because you all know this forums just seems to think that no LEO is ever capable of doing anything wrong...Lots think they ARE Leo's.