NY's Vindictive Plans for carry - special session next week to respond to SCOTUS's ruling. (Merged)

[spat]

That’s less about the police then it is about the stupid law.

Without the police the laws have no power.

Police have the ultimate veto. They have more power than the governor, the courts, and the legislature combined.

Imagine if the head of the police union said "no, that law's bullshit, we're not enforcing it".

What are the other 3 groups going to do, issue a warrant for his arrest LOL.

Without cops, all the others can do is shuffle paper.

If cops sit back and assist when the other 3 yo abuse the citizens, then they're worse than the criminals.

 

[SomeSoldier]

Sued in getting warrant? Or sued in getting an arrest off it? Big difference.
. Cops do get sued if they make mistakes on search and seizure if their actions aren’t reasonable.
Is it reasonable to believe that a gun box has a gun in it? . Not only reasonable but it’s more probable than not. This is as opposed to just a locked metal box. Big difference in the fact pattern. HUGE.
If someone saw a closed box labeled explosives, they aren’t supposed to treat it as if there were explosives in the box?

You know if there is a locked Springfield XD box in the car that it’s more probable than not that there is a gun in the lock than not. The real problem you are having is you feel the police shouldn’t be looking for the gun rather the truth of the situation that there is a high probability of a gun in that box.

Sued for holding/arresting a person to wait for a warrant based on your huntch or 51% of the time bs when it turns up nothing.

I bet DWI points would end also.

 

[spat]

Sued in getting warrant? Or sued in getting an arrest off it? Big difference.
. Cops do get sued if they make mistakes on search and seizure if their actions aren’t reasonable.
Is it reasonable to believe that a gun box has a gun in it? . Not only reasonable but it’s more probable than not. This is as opposed to just a locked metal box. Big difference in the fact pattern. HUGE.
If someone saw a closed box labeled explosives, they aren’t supposed to treat it as if there were explosives in the box?

You know if there is a locked Springfield XD box in the car that it’s more probable than not that there is a gun in the lock than not. The real problem you are having is you feel the police shouldn’t be looking for the gun rather the truth of the situation that there is a high probability of a gun in that box.

I don't know *anyone* who keeps a gun in an ammo van. I know a ton of people who have ammo cans.

Without any data your supposition than ammo can = gun is about as valid as the suggestion that every white powder in the world is cocaine.

 

[Truebeliever]

I don't know *anyone* who keeps a gun in an ammo van. I know a ton of people who have ammo cans.

Without any data your supposition than ammo can = gun is about as valid as the suggestion that every white powder in the world is cocaine.

You are mixing up something every important in search and seizure. It’s probable cause, not “in fact is” based on the totality of the circumstances.
If you saw someone snorting a white powder off a mirrored surface thru a rolled up dollar bill, could it be just some flour? Sure. But is it probable that it’s a drug? Yep. Does the police officer who observed that have to get a lab result before they could take any action? And if you believed that, how would they get a sample to be tested. The arrest and/or seizure would be based on probable cause.
The mini ziplock bag is just on the front seat of the car during a car stop in plain view. It’s the packaging common with drug usage. It could be just that the driver borrowed some flour or some sugar and put it in packaging common to drug use. But it’s still probable cause that is not flour or sugar.
So the product is seized, then field tested. If the test is negative, the probable cause disappears , the arrest is voided.
Was the officer reasonable to believe it was illegal drugs?, absolutely.
And believe or not, when cases like that do occur, it’s often because the driver thought it was drugs too but the drug dealer ripped them off-lol

 

[Truebeliever]

Without the police the laws have no power.

Police have the ultimate veto. They have more power than the governor, the courts, and the legislature combined.

Imagine if the head of the police union said "no, that law's bullshit, we're not enforcing it".

What are the other 3 groups going to do, issue a warrant for his arrest LOL.

Without cops, all the others can do is shuffle paper.

If cops sit back and assist when the other 3 yo abuse the citizens, then they're worse than the criminals.

The answer is yes. They would. Talk to the DA who disobeyed Cuomo’s order. He was arrested for official misconduct.
If a union head says that, they will hit the union up with the Taylor law and call it a job action. Fines for the union, jail for the leaders of such an action, and loss of some collective bargaining powers going forward.

 

[Truebeliever]

I don't know *anyone* who keeps a gun in an ammo van. I know a ton of people who have ammo cans.

Without any data your supposition than ammo can = gun is about as valid as the suggestion that every white powder in the world is cocaine.

Again, read the fact pattern. If a prohibited person has a locked 50 cal ammo box in their car, during a car stop. The officer wants to get a search warrant , he can. The contraband he would be looking for is AMMO. Prohibited people are banned from possession of ammo as well. Are you going to tell me people don’t keep ammo in ammo cans now?

 

[Saltwater60]

Let's just be real.


Gun ownership and the gun hobbies are all but dead now in this state. Dead.

Carry is dead. You can't carry in your car? Dead.


We've allowed a city of brainwashed sycophants determine our future.

There's nothing here to be saved..


Scorched earth.

You can carry in your car and there is an exception for it being in your immediate possession.

 

[Saltwater60]

Again, read the fact pattern. If a prohibited person has a locked 50 cal ammo box in their car, during a car stop. The officer wants to get a search warrant , he can. The contraband he would be looking for is AMMO. Prohibited people are banned from possession of ammo as well. Are you going to tell me people don’t keep ammo in ammo cans now?

I could be wrong but that appears to only be a NYC law from a quick google search.
Also a 50 cal ammo cam is likely enough to get a search warrant and lead to probable cause but many people have and use 50 cal ammo cans for many things so this is a slippery slope IMO.

 

[Truebeliever]

I could be wrong but that appears to only be a NYC law from a quick google search.
Also a 50 cal ammo cam is likely enough to get a search warrant and lead to probable cause but many people have and use 50 cal ammo cans for many things so this is a slippery slope IMO.

It’s a federal law. Villages also have local ordinances
Convicted Felon, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)See Statute
It is against federal law for a convicted felon to possess [a firearm; ammunition] that was connected with interstate [or foreign] commerce.

 

[Cavalry]

So the product is seized, then field tested. If the test is negative, the probable cause disappears , the arrest is voided.
Was the officer reasonable to believe it was illegal drugs?, absolutely.

Oh good, the notoriously inaccurate field drug test. Great metric to use

 

[Saltwater60]

The answer is yes. They would. Talk to the DA who disobeyed Cuomo’s order. He was arrested for official misconduct.
If a union head says that, they will hit the union up with the Taylor law and call it a job action. Fines for the union, jail for the leaders of such an action, and loss of some collective bargaining powers going forward.

Many sheriffs have said this, many county or city officials have also said this. Many pistol licensing officers have said the new law is impossible to enforce and they do t have enough people to do training, one on one interviews, or enough people to look through social media accounts.
These are just facts and my union tells me who they support and what laws they support.
His point is the police are the boots on the ground and if they don’t arrest and tell on said gun owner nothing will happen. I get that’s complicated to do if a business owner calls the police since there’s a record but most cops I know would never jam your up for carrying in a park. My friend is a park police Sargent and he laughed his ass off when I asked him if anyone would bother me carrying a pistol in a state park. He said none of them that he knows of cares if you’re not being stupid. I just talked to a 14 year veteran police officer and asked him how many legal gun owners he’s arrested for committing crimes with their guns and his response was none. He dealt with one legal gun owner who was a bystander of a bad fight and he drew his pistol to stop the fight, police showed up, said drop the gun, he complied and he went on his merry way.

 

[Truebeliever]

Oh good, the notoriously inaccurate field drug test. Great metric to use

The field test only goes toward probable cause. It still goes to the lab.

 

[Truebeliever]

Many sheriffs have said this, many county or city officials have also said this. Many pistol licensing officers have said the new law is impossible to enforce and they do t have enough people to do training, one on one interviews, or enough people to look through social media accounts.
These are just facts and my union tells me who they support and what laws they support.
His point is the police are the boots on the ground and if they don’t arrest and tell on said gun owner nothing will happen. I get that’s complicated to do if a business owner calls the police since there’s a record but most cops I know would never jam your up for carrying in a park. My friend is a park police Sargent and he laughed his ass off when I asked him if anyone would bother me carrying a pistol in a state park. He said none of them that he knows of cares if you’re not being stupid. I just talked to a 14 year veteran police officer and asked him how many legal gun owners he’s arrested for committing crimes with their guns and his response was none. He dealt with one legal gun owner who was a bystander of a bad fight and he drew his pistol to stop the fight, police showed up, said drop the gun, he complied and he went on his merry way.

Now ask me how many legal gun owners I have arrested for having a gun? None that I can think of.
That’s not the argument here. The debate is about search and seizure.

 

[Truebeliever]

I could be wrong but that appears to only be a NYC law from a quick google search.
Also a 50 cal ammo cam is likely enough to get a search warrant and lead to probable cause but many people have and use 50 cal ammo cans for many things so this is a slippery slope IMO.

PS— that New York City law doesn’t just apply to prohibited people but anyone who doesn’t have a gun permit or other qualifier.

 

[Cavalry]

The field test only goes toward probable cause. It still goes to the lab.

So you do not dispute the test accuracy is shit-tacular? I have read on the low end 10% and on the high 50%. You might as well flip a coin for your probable cause.
And how long does the lab test take on a holiday weekend? How long does someone sit in a jail cell waiting because you had a hunch that it was drugs and your known inaccurate test supported your hunch.
Even if it was illegal drugs, who even cares if its in a quantity relative to personal use. Do you really think arresting someone for a couple rocks or a bundle is going to change their outlook on use?
This is why law enforcement gets a bad rap.

 

[Truebeliever]

So you do not dispute the test accuracy is shit-tacular? I have read on the low end 10% and on the high 50%. You might as well flip a coin for your probable cause.
And how long does the lab test take on a holiday weekend? How long does someone sit in a jail cell waiting because you had a hunch that it was drugs and your known inaccurate test supported your hunch.
Even if it was illegal drugs, who even cares if its in a quantity relative to personal use. Do you really think arresting someone for a couple rocks or a bundle is going to change their outlook on use?
This is why law enforcement gets a bad rap.

Whatever you are reading about field test accuracy is not accurate.
Field tests are very accurate. I hadn’t gotten one wrong yet after hundreds of field tests including the tests that said it wasn’t drugs. The field tests results are recorded and compared to actual lab results. To remain field test qualified, your field tests are compared to the lab tests .
If they weren’t accurate, they would have been tossed out by the courts as probable cause.

 

[Cavalry]

Whatever you are reading about field test accuracy is not accurate.
Field tests are very accurate. I hadn’t gotten one wrong yet after hundreds of field tests including the tests that said it wasn’t drugs. The field tests results are recorded and compared to actual lab results. To remain field test qualified, your field tests are compared to the lab tests .
If they weren’t accurate, they would have been tossed out by the courts as probable cause.

The first question should be is your roadside test admissible in court? I wonder why? If they are dead on nuts accurate why confirm with a lab test?

Come on now, at least make this a bit had to debunk
Daughters ashes test positive for meth

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/05/21/dartavius-barnes-daughters-ashes-mixup/

Things known to cause false positives

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/02/26/a-partial-list-of-things-that-field-testing-drug-kits-have-mistakenly-identified-as-contraband/

Tons of links in this article on inaccuracy

Busted

Tens of thousands of people every year are sent to jail based on the results of a $2 roadside drug test. Widespread evidence shows that these tests routinely produce false positives. Why are police departments and prosecutors still using them?

www.propublica.org

Prison ordered not to use them because of inaccuracy
Judge Orders Massachusetts Prisons To Stop Using 'Highly Unreliable' Drug Field Tests To Punish Inmates

As low as 10% accuracy

Unreliable and Unchallenged

Years after the Las Vegas crime lab wanted to replace faulty police drug kits, they are still used in thousands of convictions.

www.propublica.org

I could go on, but its not like you care.

 

[Vapor]

You can carry in your car and there is an exception for it being in your immediate possession.

In fairness, I may have posted this during one of my fevers. Lol

 

[spat]

You are mixing up something every important in search and seizure. It’s probable cause, not “in fact is” based on the totality of the circumstances.
If you saw someone snorting a white powder off a mirrored surface thru a rolled up dollar bill, could it be just some flour? Sure. But is it probable that it’s a drug? Yep. Does the police officer who observed that have to get a lab result before they could take any action? And if you believed that, how would they get a sample to be tested. The arrest and/or seizure would be based on probable cause.
The mini ziplock bag is just on the front seat of the car during a car stop in plain view. It’s the packaging common with drug usage. It could be just that the driver borrowed some flour or some sugar and put it in packaging common to drug use. But it’s still probable cause that is not flour or sugar.
So the product is seized, then field tested. If the test is negative, the probable cause disappears , the arrest is voided.
Was the officer reasonable to believe it was illegal drugs?, absolutely.
And believe or not, when cases like that do occur, it’s often because the driver thought it was drugs too but the drug dealer ripped them off-lol

You have any stats on the totality of the circumstances, or is this a "trust me I have a badge" situation?


Maybe we should be able to sue over that ?

You claim probable cause because "your gut", but if the guy you jerked around can produce actual data showing it is not probable, then you are liable.


You go with the ammo can justification for a search, and some guy finds an actual study showing 99% of ammo cans in similar circumstances do *not* contain guns, then judgement plaintiff for $10,000.

 

[spat]

The first question should be is your roadside test admissible in court? I wonder why? If they are dead on nuts accurate why confirm with a lab test?

Come on now, at least make this a bit had to debunk
Daughters ashes test positive for meth

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/05/21/dartavius-barnes-daughters-ashes-mixup/

Things known to cause false positives

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/02/26/a-partial-list-of-things-that-field-testing-drug-kits-have-mistakenly-identified-as-contraband/

Tons of links in this article on inaccuracy

Busted

Tens of thousands of people every year are sent to jail based on the results of a $2 roadside drug test. Widespread evidence shows that these tests routinely produce false positives. Why are police departments and prosecutors still using them?

www.propublica.org

Prison ordered not to use them because of inaccuracy
Judge Orders Massachusetts Prisons To Stop Using 'Highly Unreliable' Drug Field Tests To Punish Inmates

As low as 10% accuracy

Unreliable and Unchallenged

Years after the Las Vegas crime lab wanted to replace faulty police drug kits, they are still used in thousands of convictions.

www.propublica.org

I could go on, but its not like you care.

I posted a link earlier to a sheriff who claimed his "drug recognition experts" were *more* reliable than the lab tests. He claimed "yea, my guys can tell, that's how we know the labs get it wrong all the time" LOL.

 

[FRB]

You have represented yourself in federal court as a criminal defendant?

Federal Civil Court, Criminal Court on a town level.

 

[spat]

Again, read the fact pattern. If a prohibited person has a locked 50 cal ammo box in their car, during a car stop. The officer wants to get a search warrant , he can. The contraband he would be looking for is AMMO. Prohibited people are banned from possession of ammo as well. Are you going to tell me people don’t keep ammo in ammo cans now?

I have a shit ton of ammo. Most of it is in ammo cans. But I have a lot of other stuff in ammo cans too.

Fewer than 50% of my ammo cans have ammo in them.

I've got one with loose change, another with family pictures, one with loose nuts and bolts, one with loose bungies and tie downs for my trailer, etc... etc...


So, again, you have any actual data that says that a random ammo can in a car would be more likely than not to have ammo in it ?

You know many gangbusters who even carry enough ammo to bother ? They're more likely to have a dozen mismatched rounds in a ziplock LOL.

 

[spat]

Now ask me how many legal gun owners I have arrested for having a gun? None that I can think of.
That’s not the argument here. The debate is about search and seizure.

The argument is about finding tissue paper thin justifications to do an end run around the 4th ammendment.

"We can't just search people at random hoping to get lucky, but I'd we can come up with the flimsiest justification to search for anything we can then search for everything".

Imagine if we eliminated all the "possession" laws that fly in the face of the spirit of the constitution and liberty. You guys would lose 90% of your excuses and might actually have to go back to real police work.

 

[Truebeliever]

The first question should be is your roadside test admissible in court? I wonder why? If they are dead on nuts accurate why confirm with a lab test?

Come on now, at least make this a bit had to debunk
Daughters ashes test positive for meth

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/05/21/dartavius-barnes-daughters-ashes-mixup/

Things known to cause false positives

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/02/26/a-partial-list-of-things-that-field-testing-drug-kits-have-mistakenly-identified-as-contraband/

Tons of links in this article on inaccuracy

Busted

Tens of thousands of people every year are sent to jail based on the results of a $2 roadside drug test. Widespread evidence shows that these tests routinely produce false positives. Why are police departments and prosecutors still using them?

www.propublica.org

Prison ordered not to use them because of inaccuracy
Judge Orders Massachusetts Prisons To Stop Using 'Highly Unreliable' Drug Field Tests To Punish Inmates

As low as 10% accuracy

Unreliable and Unchallenged

Years after the Las Vegas crime lab wanted to replace faulty police drug kits, they are still used in thousands of convictions.

www.propublica.org

I could go on, but its not like you care.

Again, to be field test qualified, the field test is compared to the lab results. If there is a discrepancy between the two, a notice is sent to many different people . In other words, don’t screw up.
What are the qualifications of the person conducting the tests. Which tests were they?
Notice the safeguards here.

 

[Truebeliever]

You have any stats on the totality of the circumstances, or is this a "trust me I have a badge" situation?


Maybe we should be able to sue over that ?

You claim probable cause because "your gut", but if the guy you jerked around can produce actual data showing it is not probable, then you are liable.


You go with the ammo can justification for a search, and some guy finds an actual study showing 99% of ammo cans in similar circumstances do *not* contain guns, then judgement plaintiff for $10,000.

The totality of the situation is individual to the case that is decided by a judge at a hearing in every contested case— the defense lawyer gets a chance to get the evidence suppressed.

 

[Truebeliever]

Federal Civil Court, Criminal Court on a town level.

Did you have a evidentiary hearing?

 

[Truebeliever]

The argument is about finding tissue paper thin justifications to do an end run around the 4th ammendment.

"We can't just search people at random hoping to get lucky, but I'd we can come up with the flimsiest justification to search for anything we can then search for everything".

Imagine if we eliminated all the "possession" laws that fly in the face of the spirit of the constitution and liberty. You guys would lose 90% of your excuses and might actually have to go back to real police work.

It’s not at random. If the officer sees something , they should investigate.

 

[spat]

It’s not at random. If the officer sees something , they should investigate.

Except almost every excuse you have for that search shouldn't even be a crime.

The spirit of the 4th ammendment is that you don't just get to go searching for a crime. You need to have identified a crime and then you can search for evidence of who committed it.

The 1st step for all of that (warrant, probable cause, etc) should be establishing that a crime has occurred. Once you have a crime, then you can search for evidence of who committed it.

If you don't even know if a crime was committed, then you shouldn't be able to go fishing for one.

 

[spat]

The totality of the situation is individual to the case that is decided by a judge at a hearing in every contested case— the defense lawyer gets a chance to get the evidence suppressed.

Does the defense lawyer have equal resources to the prosecutor to even investigate that, or is due process only for the rich ?

If it wouldn't be upheld as probable cause for Elon Musk with a dream team of lawyers, then it shouldn't be probable cause for some random poor schlub either.

I really doubt most of that BS would stand up to a real defense team.

 

[FRB]

Did you have a evidentiary hearing

Meet with a mediator for the Federal, did up depositions, then settled. The other cases were pleaded out to violations.