Law Trivia and Discussions

[rupert3]

1 minute ago, tvc184 said:

Thanks. I could be wrong but I always assume that laws that affect most people in day-to-day lives are interesting. In the many times I have spoken to the public or taught classes, there are always more questions than I have time to answer.

 A few weeks ago I helped my former partner teach a class at the Citizen Police Academy over active shooters. Naturally other questions come up besides the main topic and probably half of the time we spent discussing the thousand other law-enforcement issues.

I can just imagine how many questions can cup up in a class like this.  I would think that some or a lot of the questions are from self experience or of someone they know.

[thetragichippy]

14 hours ago, tvc184 said:

It would be a felony under federal law to purchase the firearm from a licensed dealer if the intent of the purchase was for another person.

It doesn’t matter if the other person could legally purchase the firearm.

It is legal to purchase a firearm with intent to give it as an actual gift to another person who can legally possess the firearm. That means no money changed hands.

So if you want to buy your brother a firearm as a gift because it’s his birthday, Christmas or just because you like him, it is legal. If your brother says buy it for me, because I don’t have time, it is a crime.

The reason is on Form 4473 that you must complete to buy a firearm at a federally licensed dealer such a good at a sporting good store, it asks if you are purchasing the firearm for another person. If you are buying a firearm as a gift, you are the actual purchaser unlike if money changes hands. It is yours until you intend to give it away as a bonafide gift.

As a person with a concealed carry license it scares the heck out of me I did not know this.  Legal to gift, legal to purchase as a private sale, but illegal to buy for a relative or friend( I get it, you actually lie on the application). 

Makes me wonder what other felonies I could unknowingly commit......

[tvc184]

22 minutes ago, thetragichippy said:

As a person with a concealed carry license it scares the heck out of me I did not know this.  Legal to gift, legal to purchase as a private sale, but illegal to buy for a relative or friend( I get it, you actually lie on the application). 

Makes me wonder what other felonies I could unknowingly commit......

Things that make you go hmmmm….

 Buy a gun and a month later maybe you don’t like it and sell it in a private sale.

Cash….

 The biggest problem that people have is we can’t stop talking.

 And the classic, I will tell you but don’t tell anyone.   
 

My old Cajun boss (Ollie The Mover), who had a bunch a Yogi Berra type sayings that are classic. Something has to jog  my memory to recall any of them but this is one of those times.

About keeping a secret he would say: “Don’t tell but if you tell, tell the one you tell not to tell”. 

[SmashMouth]

The best practice is "Mum's the word..." Easier said than done for some though.

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

The best practice is "Mum's the word..." Easier said than done for some though.

“Easier said than done for xxxx most though.”

Fixed it for you. 

[rupert3]

I guess that's what Yogi meant when he said. "when you come to a fork in the road, take it".  I just add make sure you take the one that is right.

[tvc184]

4 minutes ago, rupert3 said:

I guess that's what Yogi meant when he said. "when you come to a fork in the road, take it".  I just add make sure you take the one that is right.

Yogi-isms. 

or mine…

Ollie-isms.  

[tvc184]

5 minutes ago, rupert3 said:

I guess that's what Yogi meant when he said. "when you come to a fork in the road, take it".  I just add make sure you take the one that is right.

One of my favorite, when we would talk about a guy that no matter what you did, saw, met, etc., he has done better or his uncle, brother or first cousin twice remove did.

 I went to school with a guy like that. You could be fishing with him and catch a 6 pound bass and he would toss in, “that ain’t nothing, my brother in law caught an 8 pounder last week on 6 pound test line”.

Or talking about something in law enforcement and someone will throw in, “you’re wrong because my next door neighbor has a cousin in Kansas and he goes to church with a cop who said… blah blah”. 

Ollie called that…. The man that seen the man that seen the man that seen the bear”.

[rupert3]

You are so right, It has taken me 79 years to learn how to keep my mouth shut and I slowly getting there.

[WOSdrummer99]

On 5/11/2023 at 8:45 PM, LumRaiderFan said:

 When it’s realized that a good guy got caught up in it by accident, seems like that could be considered.

Maybe the cop would let it slide

[tvc184]

7 hours ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

Maybe the cop would let it slide

Maybe.

Some will, some won’t.

Most actions in law enforcement are discretionary. The law generally doesn’t require actions on the part of the police. There are a few limited examples of a required action but very few. Even some of those were added fairly recently.  

[WOSdrummer99]

16 hours ago, tvc184 said:

There are a few limited examples of a required action but very few. Even some of those were added fairly recently.  

Like what?

[tvc184]

15 hours ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

Like what?

There are two word combinations in law that are huge. Maybe huge would be an understatement. Those combinations are and/or and may/shall. It is not just in law-enforcement but for law in general.

Mostly to your question is may/shall. Most law enforcement/police actions fall under “may” which means optional or discretionary. A very limited few say “shall” which is translated as mandatory.

An example is making an arrest without a warrant. There is a whole list of justifications for arresting a person without a warrant under Texas law such as “may arrest” for any crime witnessed. They “may arrest” for family (domestic) violence even if they did not witness it. They “may arrest” for a felony even if they did not witness it and it is in immediate/fresh pursuit. They “may arrest” a person, interfering with another person trying to make an emergency phone call even if they did not witness it.

If a child is missing or a runaway, the officer shall immediately make a report and immediately enter the person into the national FBI computer database or NCIC.

If an adult is missing and endangered, the police shall make a report and enter the person into the same NCIC computer data base, within two hours. Not only is there no option that the police “may” wait for a person to be missing for 24 hours before they make a report, the law  is mandatory that a missing person must be entered into the computer within those two hours. If an officer says that a person has to be missing for 24 hours before they make a report, that is a violation of the law and the officer can be held responsible and sued.

There are extremely recent mandatory actions by the police, most likely prompted by the George Floyd incident. I believe one is to render aid to any person who may be injured during an arrest or use of force by the police. The other is to step in and intervened if they witnessed another officer committing a violation of a person’s rights.

If you want to cut it short and without explanation, out of hundreds of pages of laws and thousands of laws or requirements, the police SHALL;

Shall make a report of a 1. claimed assault, 2. a possible domestic violence or 3. identity theft.

Shall document traffic stops.

Shall make an arrest for the violation of a Protective Order, witnessed by the officer.

Shall make a police report and enter a child into the national database immediately and if an adult, within two hours.

Shall render aid for any action taken by an officer and Shall, intervener if another officer is witnessed violating a person’s rights.

Edit for auto correct gibberish. Like it changed a person’s rights to the price is right…  

and other words that didn’t make sense. 

 

 

 

 

.

[rupert3]

Is it me or is there no fear or concerns about going to jail anymore by the bad folks.  Is it because the bad guy know that they will have a place to stay and meals to eat.  Or is the sensationalism by the media that we see and hear more and mor of arrest on a regular basis of the bad folks just know they will get out shortly and do it again.  It just seems like it is getting worse and worse.

Like your guy with five tv sets.. 

[tvc184]

30 minutes ago, rupert3 said:

Is it me or is there no fear or concerns about going to jail anymore by the bad folks.  Is it because the bad guy know that they will have a place to stay and meals to eat.  Or is the sensationalism by the media that we see and hear more and mor of arrest on a regular basis of the bad folks just know they will get out shortly and do it again.  It just seems like it is getting worse and worse.

Like your guy with five tv sets.. 

Street creds.

[rupert3]

27 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

Street creds.

? Lost me sir

[tvc184]

30 minutes ago, rupert3 said:

Is it me or is there no fear or concerns about going to jail anymore by the bad folks.  Is it because the bad guy know that they will have a place to stay and meals to eat.  Or is the sensationalism by the media that we see and hear more and mor of arrest on a regular basis of the bad folks just know they will get out shortly and do it again.  It just seems like it is getting worse and worse.

Like your guy with five tv sets.. 

I do think that crime has taken a turn and not for the better. Crime always fluctuates and there are trends that might run for a decade. About 40 years ago, I thought there was more violent crime but we seem to be heading that way again   Now it is in the news way more with 24 hour social media so it makes people more aware.

I tend to think that there are way more arrests than the public might realize. Even calls for service might be more than the average citizen knows.

Counting traffic stops, pedestrians stops and people calling to report robberies, assaults, disturbances, prowlers, fights, vehicle accidents, break-ins, etc., with 10 officers on the  street I have seen a single shift have over 100 calls. That is not 100 officers dispatched to but 100 calls for service. Many calls such as a bad accident, a shooting or an arm robbery, might take 6 to 8 officers. So out of 10-12 officers on a shift, on a really busy day maybe 200+ officers will be dispatched. On an average shift on evenings or nights it might be like 100 officers dispatched.

Probably 10 years ago I was working the night shift as the only supervisor. Within about 90 minutes we had three major shootings. In the first, two men were shot in the chest after an argument and I honestly thought both were going to die, making it a Capital Murder or death penalty case. A witness thought that the shooter had ran into a house so I secured the perimeter with other officers and was about to call out Swat. After about 10 minutes of sitting on that house, the next shooting came in and that for sure was a murder with one person dead and two other people shot. We had to abandon sitting on the possible suspect.

While at the next scene for about 30 minutes, we heard heavy weapons fire by 10 blocks away like an AK47 or AR15 (which is what it turned out to be). In fact, I was the one that reported it to the dispatcher before we started receiving calls. So we had two people who I expected to die at the first scene (both survived) and one for sure dead and two injured at the second scene.

They were no officers available for the third scene so I had to send a couple of officers from the murder scene to go check out the third incident. I think they found three people shot with one guy shot through the liver. He was critical, and I think he eventually died later, but I don’t remember. In fact, the officers called for EMS and there were no units available. Some of the victim’s friends threw him in the backseat of a private car while he was pumping out blood started heading for the hospital.

 While those aren’t average shifts, they are not unheard of and extremely busy shifts are sometimes the norm.

I kind of doubt that the public really knows how much really goes on around them. 

[tvc184]

30 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

Street creds.

Ask Buddy Garrity or others about street creds  

[tvc184]

An officer in Beaumont witnesses a crime (shooting, burglary, robbery, etc). The suspect jumps into a vehicle and gets away before the officer can get turned around in traffic.

 The officer puts out an attempt to locate to area police departments like Nederland, Vidor, Port Arthur and so on with a description of the vehicle. 

Twenty-five minutes later an officer in Port Arthur sees a vehicle that fits the description given by BPD almost half an hour ago.

Can the PAPD officer use the word of a BPD officer, as relayed through a dispatcher, as justification to detain the person or even do a felony traffic stop?

I guess I’m asking, can an officer from one jurisdiction, give probable cause to another officer in another jurisdiction several miles away that justifies police action?

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

An officer in Beaumont witnesses a crime (shooting, burglary, robbery, etc). The suspect jumps into a vehicle and gets away before the officer can get turned around in traffic.

 The officer puts out an attempt to locate to area police departments like Nederland, Vidor, Port Arthur and so on with a description of the vehicle. 

Twenty-five minutes later an officer in Port Arthur sees a vehicle that fits the description given by BPD almost half an hour ago.

Can the PAPD officer use the word of a BPD officer, as relayed through a dispatcher, as justification to detain the person or even do a felony traffic stop?

I guess I’m asking, can an officer from one jurisdiction, give probable cause to another officer in another jurisdiction several miles away that justifies police action?

I would certainly hope so.

[SmashMouth]

I believe the PAPD officer would have a sufficient basis for stop since the BPD officer had a first-hand observation and could be relied upon as a reliable source. Of course, I could be totally off the mark! Lol.

[tvc184]

Both are correct.

Daily bonus points for the legal doctrine that generally (but not completely) covers an officer when taking the word of another officer. 
 

Google is allowed….

[LumRaiderFan]

21 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

Both are correct.

Daily bonus points for the legal doctrine that generally (but not completely) covers an officer when taking the word of another officer. 
 

Google is allowed….

Probable cause?

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Probable cause?

That is absolutely….. incorrect.

 In fact PC is not required to detain, only reasonable suspicion.

 But that isn’t what I was looking for. 

[Judex]

11 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

That is absolutely….. incorrect.

 In fact PC is not required to detain, only reasonable suspicion.

 But that isn’t what I was looking for. 

Qualified immunity is what generally covers them from civil repercussions.