Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - JDN

Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
151
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« on: December 19, 2008, 09:04:55 PM »
As a side note, in the post "Knife Fight in my Apartment"" the guy put the individual in a crude choke hold"; it worked.
And he stopped the fight.

But what happened if he didn't do it right and the guy died?  Or was permanently injured.  The "good samaritan is liable
for all he's got... and then some.  And maybe should be...?  Choke holds are tricky.  LAPD stopped doing it
due to "problems"; and the City paid out millions.

152
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« on: December 19, 2008, 08:59:26 PM »
I understand; back to your anyone can sue anyone comment.

But rarely is a peace officer personally liable except in truly extreme egregious circumstances.
Going back to the issue of liability, a peace officer could accidental kill an innocent
bystander in a shootout; of course sad, but still within the scope of his/her duties.
The city/governmental agency might end up paying, but not the police officer.
In contrast, at least under CA law, the non peace officer would not have the "protection" of acting within the scope
of their duties.  Therefore, personal liability...  house and savings gone...
Better to stay out of it...?

153
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« on: December 19, 2008, 08:15:17 PM »
Actually, it is a little bit different.  While I agree "you face potential liability for anything and everything" one must play the odds.
As a peace officer, actually rarely do you personally face the consequences; the city or governmental agency gets sued and they
pay.  You simply go on with your life - note, that is how it should be; a law enforcement officer should not have to second
guess and concern themselves with personal civil liability.  However, as a private citizen, it's my pocketbook, no third party is going to
pick up the tab.  And even having no assets does not prevent a suit; in CA a judgment is good for 10 years and is renewable.
How long am I suppose to be poor?  :-)

Then again, I am not arguing with "doing what is right".  But in the LA Times example, she did what they thought is right.
And yet she will pay for it.  Sad, if the car had burned and she did not intervene, she has no liability.

And yet the CA Supreme Court said she is liable since she did intervene. 



154
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« on: December 19, 2008, 07:02:48 PM »
GM, your example is different; the woman herself was attacked; she was defending herself (quite ably)
and is of course entitled to defend herself even in CA.

But let's say another person was being robbed at knifepoint, and the woman interceded.  And,
let's say she used her gun and people were hurt or killed.

My question, given the CA Supreme Court ruling (rather unexpected) it now seems that if an innocent
or even the guilty party is injured the "good samaritan" may have civil liability.   I intercede, help
someone out, people get hurt, and I lose my house and savings...

155
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« on: December 19, 2008, 01:34:49 PM »
Marc, I could too have posted the entire article; perhaps I should have.  What I am more interested in
is your comments and thoughts; does one intervene?  Or do you think twice?  For example a robbery is taking place.  The robber
has a gun.  He says the usual, "give me the money or I will shoot you".  You are a citizen/customer armed with
a weapon.  Do you intervene?  My point, if for example you do intervene and the clerk is shot, did your good
samaritan action make you liable in CA?  Maybe the thief was going to simply leave with the money?  But you
intervened and the robber then shot the clerk.  Your good samaritan intervention indirectly caused injury or
death.  Are you liable?   Perhaps now under this ruling the clerk or his estate has action against you?


156
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Citizens defend themselves/others.
« on: December 19, 2008, 11:13:53 AM »
Peregrine wrote, "The guy who intervened is a hero imho."

Personally, I agree, but...

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-good-samaritan19-2008dec19,0,4033454.story

The article is too long to copy, but the gist of the article is that if you intervene, even for good cause,
you may be liable.

"Torti has no immunity for her bravery in pulling her injured friend from a crashed vehicle even if she
reasonably believed it might be about to explode."

So you try to help, thinking you are doing the "right thing" and now you are liable.  Your good samaritan
action may cost you your house and life savings.

157
Martial Arts Topics / Re: What would you like to see from DBMA?
« on: November 10, 2008, 06:27:38 AM »
Perhaps a little more on canes or walking sticks. 

Short (24" - 28") sticks are fine, but not very practical nor often times are they legal to carry around.

But I can bring a cane or often I bring a thick 3' stick "walking stick" anywhere including the courthouse;
perfectly legal and very effective.

And 3" bladed folders; again they are legal and practical to carry around (but not in the courthouse).

158
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Street Weapons
« on: October 03, 2008, 08:24:11 AM »
Don't know on which post to put this, but I found it interesting.  Recently, I hurt my knee; I have a big brace (padding and steel) and also I need to use a cane.
Yesterday, as I was entering the Courthouse, the guy in front of me was stopped for having a lighter; it was a big deal. Next in line, I have a full JO with me that I use
as a walking stick.  No problem whatsoever; no question, nothing.  As for my brace, (which is big enough to hold a gun or multiple knives) of course
it set the alarm off; however again, no problem - no questions, no examination (the walk through alarm does not show shape), they just waved me through. 
My point; if it looks harmless, it still might not be.



159
Martial Arts Topics / Re: VIDEO CLIPS OF INTEREST
« on: September 21, 2008, 07:22:17 PM »
I agree with all your points, but Google is an American Company.  Blame us too; that they/we would succumb to this type of censorship is wrong. 

160
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Knife Clips
« on: September 14, 2008, 11:31:43 AM »
The Pentecost book is a must read.  I had a two hour conversation with him once that changed how I see certain things.

It is a good book.  Crafty, if you have time, could you elaborate on your comment "... that changed how I see certain things."

james

161
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues
« on: August 22, 2008, 12:43:16 PM »
Hmmmmm. That kind of sounds like making a brief statement to the police.....    :evil:

Maybe  :-D  hmmm

But it's a short one and I talk fast.   :-)




162
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues
« on: August 22, 2008, 07:45:58 AM »
First and immediately I would call 911. I would say something short like, "send an ambulance, I was attacked and someone is very badly hurt, I am located at ...." And no more.  Next, I would then call my attorney (I have enough friends who are one - no retainer necessary) and follow his/her advice. 

163
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues
« on: August 22, 2008, 06:48:57 AM »

**The point were are debating is not to have an attorney or not, but if it's good policy to never talk to the police, no matter what.**[/b]
[/quote]

Perhaps I was/am not clear; often there is a need and/or it is appropriate to talk to police; however I think it ONLY should be done with one's lawyer present; not in the heat of the moment when you are under extreme stress and adrenalin is out of control; people say the strangest things and it might come back to haunt you.  As you pointed out, if a shooting happened while you are on duty, you are required (unlike a normal citizen who may rightfully decline to answer) to file a report by the end of the day, yet note, even you (a trained officer of the law) are not required nor expected to say anything at the scene.  Why?  Because officers understand, your union understands that by the end of the day, you have had time to get your wits about you AND contact an attorney.  I think a normal citizen should simply do the same.

164
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues
« on: August 21, 2008, 11:42:49 AM »
Let's get this straight; Miquel Goodguy killed one (Johnny Ratzo) and wounded two others forcing them to flee.  And Miguel is covered in blood.  No witnesses to how it started, just one witnesses report, "fight in progress".  Seems to me that the Det. has PC to arrest Mr. Goodguy regardless of how he tells the story and/or the previous arrest record of the "victims". 

Talking to police MAY get him exonerated OR arrested.  And his own words might bury him later.  The "disparity of force and violence of the assault" needs to be proven and evaluated by the DA.  And hanging overhead is the potential civil action of the "sweet and innocent" bride of dear but dead Johnny Ratzo.  What was Mr. Goodguy's state of mind?  Could lethal force have been avoided?  Did he try to retreat, or did he take the attack to them?  We (the police) don't know the "facts", just Mr. Goodguy's opinion. 

I still would think Basic Rule # is to keep your mouth shut.  "I am so shook up, I just can't talk right now..." and wait until your attorney arrives is good advice.  Wait for an attorney; his job is to defend you.

As an example, most Officer Involved Shooting Protocols ask for the officer involved to give a voluntary statement immediately after the shooting.  Yet in nearly every case BEFORE giving a voluntary statement to his own police department the officer involved will "speak with their attorney PRIOR to giving a voluntary statement."  Now, if a police officer thinks an attorney is necessary BEFORE he gives a voluntary statement, I sure do!

165
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues
« on: August 13, 2008, 09:34:30 PM »
Ahhhh that is my concern; protection/erosion of Civil Liberties.

166
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues
« on: August 13, 2008, 08:52:54 PM »
I understand; the expectation of "privacy" of or in a car is minimal.  But personal searches are different.
And if you have a GPS, leading the Police to you, yet you are on private property,
additional legal/warrant questions remain unanswered.  And is that right?

167
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues
« on: August 13, 2008, 02:59:21 PM »
Now I understand; I had misinterpreted your "Good".  I had thought you were in favor of less expectation
of privacy.  I agree in most instances legislation and case law is quite clear, and overall, I think probably fair.
As noted above, I suppose GPS and new technology needs further case law, coming in on one side or another,
to bring closure to this specific debate.

168
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues
« on: August 13, 2008, 02:33:19 PM »
Good.



To paraphrase, I think you are saying it is, "good to have no reasonable expectation of privacy"?
Where do you draw the line? Or don't you?

169
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues
« on: August 13, 2008, 10:26:35 AM »
No. Reasonable. Expectation. of. Privacy.

And do you think that is good or bad?

170
Martial Arts Topics / Re: What would you have done?
« on: June 30, 2008, 08:13:52 AM »
David, in your example, I am sticking with "nothing should be done".  At least by you
or a civilian.  As for calling the police, it's my understanding that the Austrian Police
are very efficient.  They would be there ASAP - I think your inlaws have a good
handle on the situation. 

I happen to agree with GM's posts, all of them, but I like the one where he says,
"Is it worth killing, dying, or going to prison for?".   So David, as per your comment
that you only get involved "if your risks are minimal", I guess that means you only
get involved if you know you are bigger, stronger, and/or better armed? 

In contrast, Karsk asked if and I agree there is a line.  In the original post, when a child is
being brutally murdered, I think it would be worth killing, dying or going to prison for
to try to save the life of that innocent child.  However, in a domestic situation, no one
is totally innocent - GM's advice, just stay out of it or call the police.  Even the police have a tough
time handling the situation as pointed out above.  As your in laws implied, mind
your own business.



PS I guess I still don't quite get the "sex slave" quote.   It bothers me.
You didn't even meet the couple yet you have a strong opinion.  I think your quote is
presumptuous.   Is it language?  Here in LA many people are married to foreigners and their
language is not common and communication is an issue.  So if I go to Italy, France or Germany
and come home with a wife (I only speak Japanese and a little Spanish)
she would be my "sex slave"?
Is it economics?  So second/third world country brides are presumptively "sex slaves"? 
Anotherwords, most mainland Chinese, Philippina, Thai, Latina, etc. wives are "sex slaves"?
I still don't quite get it.  I think it best not to make presumptions of other people's
relationships.  Nor to intercede unless you are asked and someone's life is obviously
in danger. 

171
Martial Arts Topics / Re: What would you have done?
« on: June 29, 2008, 06:52:04 PM »
Horrible.  It's amazing that people can witness this and not do anything to stop it, but I do think it's "normal".  I had a couple of psychology classes in college and remember this "phenomenon" actually has a name that escapes me at the moment.  I think one lesson to be learned is that you cannot rely upon anyone to help you if you're ever being attacked yourself. 

On a related but very less intense note...this weekend I was having dinner at my in-law's house.  We were eating out on the back patio and started hearing a woman screaming.  At first it sounded as if she could have been playing, as if being tickled too severely, but then it started to sound like she was in pain.  We recognized that it was coming from the house next door, where a man lives with what we think is a "mail order", young Thai wife.  My wife and I got up and quickly went to where we could see the house, and just as I was going to jump the fence, the woman stopped screaming and the man appeared, pulling up his pants.  However, he looked very relaxed and not at all like he was involved in a physical confrontation or abusive moment in any way.  He looked a bit embarrassed and said sorry, they were just playing around.  Then a moment later the woman came out and looked as if nothing was wrong, said hello, etc.  These people are very strange.  They have no curtains, and you can see that they watch porn at all hours of the day, from the time they get up until the time they go to bed.

What struck me about the situation though was that if myself and my wife would not have gotten up to see what was going on, my in-law's would not have.  When we came back to the table my in-laws said they had heard the woman screaming before, and had also heard the couple arguing, yelling, etc, but that it was "their problem".  I said, yeah, but you can't allow someone to get abused without doing anything, and my father-in-law said, "of course not", totally agreeing with my statement.  However, although he would verbally say you can't allow abuse to occur, he didn't get up to see what was going on.  I find this to be strange and a bit disconcerting.

I've noticed similar situations in New Orleans, where I'd stop a man from abusing a woman...very often drunk...and other people would be standing around doing nothing.  While I think it's horrible to stand by and do nothing, I do think it appears to be quite the normal human instinct.  Maybe it's a Darwinian survival mechanism...the weak are allowed to die, and you increase your chances of survival by staying out of trouble.  Really, I think the lesson to be learned is that if you don't act, no one will, and not to expect help yourself.



"Mail order" young Thai wife?  And that means???  Having stayed in Bangkok as a guest of the Japanese Embassy, I found the
Thai people, especially the woman to be intelligent and very attractive; definitely equal to American woman I have met.  And this couple seem to enjoy each other.   :-D  Frankly, I think Asians in general seem to get a bad rap here.

And your advice, "just as I was about to jump the fence", doesn't cut it.  Sure, get up if you want. Sure knock on the door if you want - but maybe they won't answer.  I wouldn't, especially given the above circumstances  :-D Or call the Police if you want.  But, while I don't know LA law, here in liberal CA if you jump my fence and threaten me, I might simply shoot you.  Justifiably.  So think twice, thrice before you get involved in someone else's domestic business.  And don't ever jump someones fence and threaten them.  Perhap because they are older, and perhaps wiser, in contrast to your opinion, I do think your "inlaws get it"; they would call the police if they thought it was appropriate, but they are not going to intrude in a neighbor's home or in a domestic situation.  It's none of their business.  Again, as I mentioned above, that is the job of the police; you need to stay out of it.  Simple; let the police handle it.  Nearly all civilians including myself are not qualified to interced; further, it's inappropriate, and you might get hurt or worse.

172
Martial Arts Topics / Re: What would you have done?
« on: June 29, 2008, 12:50:29 PM »
This past weekend, I was going to the store and I drove past a pretty large First Nations fellow, manhandling his girlfriend.  He was yelling and screaming  and although I did not see it, I think he was slapping her around.  I stopped my car and started to walk over to the guy.  At the same time about 6 other men did the same thing.  On of them visible took out a cell phone and started dialing.    I was to one side and about 4 of the other men were on the other.  We are about  50 feet away.   In this case, the fellow noticed.

He started talking to the crowd.  Saying really loud things like  "Whats your problem?" and shooting the bird.  No one approached but no one left.  He kept chest pounding and walked to his car shaking his head.  His girlfriend got in with him.

Something mild perhaps compared to the above horrendous story.  Sometimes the right combination of things match up.  The guys awareness was still there.  He wasn't enraged nby the time people had gathered.  The proximity of the people around him, the witnesses, the phone call, and the growing attention was enough in this case.

The story above, seems way past that.  Very  bizarre.

How about a belt looped over the guys head tied to a truck?

Karsk

While no one can excuse helping an innocent baby, or other truly extreme circumstances, in general I question the appropriateness of sticking your nose in somebody else's business.  A "crazy" guy on a bus with an umbrella?  Not your problem, that is up to the bus driver to decide what to do.  As for the above example, note, his "girlfriend got in the car with him".  So if she doesn't have a problem, why is an outsider suppose to intercede?  And guess who the police would arrest if you "looped a belt over the guys head tied to a truck"?  For your "heroic" actions, you could well be serving serious jail time not to mention a civil suit.  Best to call 911, period, and move on.  The police are trained to handle the situation, the average citizen is not.  Even the police, the experts, time after time, advice citizens not to intercede.  I think it is good advice.

173


Hmmmm "Hero"???

According to the article, Beverly;

1. signed and acknowledged clear company policy not to interfere
2. there was no mention of Beverly having any military/police experience
3. the local Police Capt. in his expert opinion clearly said it was wrong to interfere
4. the MN EEOC also ruled that the employee acted wrongly and in error
5. the female employee was NEVER attacked proven as per the video AND testimony
    given by the same female employee

Frankly, the Marathon spokeswoman was right, "he endangered himself and her
(the other female employee)."

This story has a "happy ending" but what if the robber, rather than simply leaving
with $15.00, out of anger or stress shot Beverly AND shot and maybe killed the other
innocent female employee who had merely been following company policy?  Would we
be singing praises to Beverly for contributing to his co-worker's death?  And not
to mention, while not important compared to human life, the female employee
and/or her estate would probably file a wrongful death suit against Marathon
because of the grossly negligent Beverly.

This story has a "Happy Ending" and resolved itself ONLY because Beverly finally listened
to the robber and decided NOT to be a "Hero". Otherwise his stupidity almost got two
people killed over $15.00.

174
Martial Arts Topics / Tokyo Knife Attack
« on: June 08, 2008, 03:22:23 PM »
I'm in Japan business/pleasure and dominating the TV news while I eat breakfast
is the the knife attack in Tokyo (Akihabara).  In three minutes, he attacked 17 people and killed
at least 7.  Truly tragic.  It shows the speed and power of the knife.

175
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Knife Law
« on: May 25, 2008, 09:04:12 AM »
Quote
Police/Sheriff's don't make the Law.

No.  But they get to interpret it.


Personally I never worried about getting sued.  I could articulate and justify every single thing I ever did.  And I did the things I thought needed doing without the slightest hesitation.

I did get sued one time (and only once) in the early 80s.  For a million dollars!  Man that was like badge of honor.  The case was thrown out at the first hearing.  Because when you bogusly claim you have been beaten to within an inch of your life at the time of arrest, then your booking photos should not show that you did not have a single scratch on you.

I did go major hands on a bandit once.  Under your theory I should have been quivering in my shoes from his lawsuit.  To him it was a badge of honor.  Two days after the event, when he was in a cell in the facility and saw me, he started bragging to the others in the cell about the the ass whooping he got, and asked me to verify it to the others. 



Cold War Scout,

Ahhhh actually they (Police/Sheriff) DON'T get to interpret the Law; that's why we have Judges and maybe the DA's Office.  But the Police/Sheriff?  They simply enforce the law - it is NOT their prerogative to interpret it.

As for the lawsuit, I agree, don't worry, not your problem; here in LA the City pays with taxpayer's money.  Frankly, I think the money really should come out of the Officer's personal assets. His mistake, it should be his "ass". 

As for the "major hands on a bandit once", don't know about that, but maybe that is why LA Police Department still has the Feds looking over their shoulder and LA is spending millions on Federal Mandated Police Oversight and has awarded millions to citizens falsely manhandled and falsely arrested.  Wasted taxpayer's dollars at work all because of a few rogue and publically vilified cops.

Kind of gives Police/Sheriff's a bad name, don't you think?  I kind of feel sorry for the many outstanding ones like the Senior Deputy I mentioned.

176
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Knife Law
« on: May 25, 2008, 07:12:27 AM »
I think JDN's response to Crafty on a couple of issues is basically a solid one.  However...


Quote
Let me give you an example.  As a hobby/business I really like photography.  I usually shoot people; individuals.  I was at the Van Nuys Courthouse last week for court business, but I brought my camera; I like watching people outside court.  But maybe I should have brought a gun, it would have been easier to explain.  As I entered, the rent a cop said, "No cameras allowed" to me.  I said, "No, the sign says, "no taking pictures, I don't intend to take a picture inside the Courthouse and the camera/lens cost over 10k so you can't have it."
 

Having had to help draft these types of polices, I can attest to the importance of absolute specificity and clarity.  I suspect the prevailing courthouse rules are "no taking of pictures", not "no possession of cameras."


Quote
The law is the law; obey it, but if you are within your rights and are obeying the law and have nothing to hide, do not fear or be concerned about the erroneous opinion or negative inferences of a police officer.

Certainly not a personal policy I would encourage but to each his own.  There are ways to deal with people who want to get all Donkey Kong.  From the moment somebody takes that attitude, they have to be right every time.  The cop only has to be right once.  I won't go into tactics and techniques, but I have personally dealt with people wanting to show their ass in a most satisfactory and very satisfying manner (as in I left the courthouse that Friday night and had a beer, and they got to go to the Baltimore city Jail).
[/quote]




Cold War Scout,

Maybe I misinterpreted your comment, but...
"Donkey Kong"?  "show their ass"?  hmmmm I think in the above post I mentioned that I was polite as was the Senior Deputy.  And I broke no law; I just pointed out my legal rights.  Actually, the only "ass" in the story was the initial Sheriff who huffed and puffed but didn't know his own "ass" about the law.  I just listened to him and asked for his Supervisor.  Maybe that's why he was the Supervisor...

So assuming similar legal circumstances in your example, "they went to Baltimore City Jail" on what bogus fictitious charge???  I don't know Baltimore Laws, but in LA, if you arrested and booked someone (who knows the law and has a few dollars) given the above scenario, before you finished your beers, he would be out of jail, also, most likely your personnel file would be negatively noted and you might even be suspended on Monday, plus the civil suit against the City/County would be for more than an LA Police/Sheriff makes in a year.  Not good.

Police/Sheriff's are not above the law; their duty is to know and enforce the law; Police/Sheriff's don't make the Law.  And it is the Public's responsibility to obey the law. 



177
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Knife Law
« on: May 24, 2008, 08:01:45 AM »
"Another interesting question might have been, if I was stopped by the officer in LA and he noticed my 6" screwdriver on the seat next to me; what would he do?  Probably nothing, but IF he asked, "what is the screwdriver for?" and I said, "self defense", he would be entitled to arrest me for having a dagger longer than 3" (LA City Limit).

"But the issue still is not "intent".  The issue is whether the instrument is legal to carry or not."

Disagree.  By your own words it is precisely the intent that turns it into a dagger.

As for the right to not answer, I suppose so-- but I submit that an answer the equivalent of "I don't have to tell you" is likely to heighten the LEO's propensity to make all the negative inferences he can and act upon them.  Yes?


Actually no; it was not my words that turned it into a dagger; it already by definition was a dagger, i.e. a sharp pointy thing; however it is up to the officer's judgment whether he was looking at an illegal weapon; i.e. a dagger longer than 3" in LA jurisdiction.  I understand your point, and perhaps I am splitting hairs; BUT if I has said nothing, or if I had said, "I am fixing my front door" he still would have the right to arrest me for having an illegal weapon (dagger longer than 3").  It is the item itself, the dagger, that is illegal, not my intent. 

And yes, it is likely to heighten the LEO's propensity to make negative inferences if I am vague or refuse to answer.  So?  If I am carrying nothing illegal, i.e. only a baseball bat he can huff and puff, and maybe waste some of my time, but what else can he do?

Let me give you an example.  As a hobby/business I really like photography.  I usually shoot people; individuals.  I was at the Van Nuys Courthouse last week for court business, but I brought my camera; I like watching people outside court.  But maybe I should have brought a gun, it would have been easier to explain.  As I entered, the rent a cop said, "No cameras allowed" to me.  I said, "No, the sign says, "no taking pictures, I don't intend to take a picture inside the Courthouse and the camera/lens cost over 10k so you can't have it."  The Sheriff came, we discussed it, and it was agreed I could keep the camera.  I testified at a trial, did my job, and went outside the courthouse, had a nice cigar and cup of coffee.  I then began shooting (camera, I forget this is a martial art forum) individuals.

Sheriff comes up to me and yells, "Stop".  "Why" I say?  He said, "it's illegal to take pictures".  I said, "No, it's illegal to take pictures inside the courthouse, but outside is fair game.".  He huffed and he puffed.  We argued, I asked for his supervisor, and the Senior Deputy, while not very happy (we were both polite and courteous) agreed that I have every right to take pictures of people outside the courthouse.  My long (sorry) point?  The law is the law; obey it, but if you are within your rights and are obeying the law and have nothing to hide, do not fear or be concerned about the erroneous opinion or negative inferences of a police officer.

178
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Knife Law
« on: May 24, 2008, 06:58:11 AM »
Crafty,


Which brings me to my point. 

If a LEO pulls over someone with a baseball bat on his front seat, and conversation reveals no baseball game in the near past or future, and upon query as to the reason for the bat the answer is given "Self Defense", I'm thinking this could lead to legally unhappy consequences.

Re Section 12020, I'm thinking the same applies to that screwdriver in your pocket.  If frisked per a "Terry stop" (calling all LEOs, am I using the term correctly?) i.e. a pat down search and the screwdriver turns up and your answer is "self-defense", again I am thinking your intent could lead to legally unhappy consequences.

Yes?

I think the two items are different.  No law that I know of specifically refers to or describes a baseball bat.  Of course, if I use the baseball bat, a pipe, golf club, etc. illegally, a weapons charge may result and lead to "unhappy consequences".  However, you have no obligation to tell the officer why you have the baseball bat, golf club, etc. nor is there any thing he can charge you with even if you do say "self defense". 

In contrast, a screwdriver can legally be interpreted as a sharp pointy thing, i.e. a dagger and therefore by definition illegal (12020) to carry hidden.  He pats you down, finds that you are carrying it concealed and therefore it is an illegal weapon, which then probably will lead to your "legally unhappy consequences."

Another interesting question might have been, if I was stopped by the officer in LA and he noticed my 6" screwdriver on the seat next to me; what would he do?  Probably nothing, but IF he asked, "what is the screwdriver for?" and I said, "self defense", he would be entitled to arrest me for having a dagger longer than 3" (LA City Limit).

But the issue still is not "intent".  The issue is whether the instrument is legal to carry or not.

james

179
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Knife Law
« on: May 23, 2008, 12:28:26 PM »

Maybe  :lol:

I certainly appreciate your giving us the sections of the CA code involved and your summary of them.  May I push my luck further and ask for the URLs and/or the actual language of the statutes?

Also, may I suggest what remains open on the question of intent is whether one is allowed to carry ANYTHING with the intent of it being a weapon?  A baseball bat is legal , , , for baseball.  A bat for the purpose of a weapon may not be.  Anyone?

CD
============

Crafty; sorry my computer skills are limited  :-D

As for baseball, pipes, etc. the way it was explained to me is that "if you use it in
an unlawful manner, there could be a weapon's charge.".  But there is no law prohibiting you
from carrying a baseball bat in your car.  Nor do you have to explain why you have it.

In contrast, if you are carrying a screwdriver, knitting needle, etc. in your pants pocket
concealed, it might be considered a "dagger" and you could be charged under PC 12020
et al even if your "intent" was only to fix your front door.

180
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Karambit Vs. straight blades
« on: May 23, 2008, 12:00:36 PM »
Scott,

"...In a Model Penal Code jurisdiction, you could have a complete defense."

You succinctly raise many important points regarding "self defense".   Question, I am not an attorney
(I do Fraud Investigation) but to clarify, it is my understanding that California is NOT a Model Penal Code
jurisdiction, the Model Penal Code is simply advisory here.  Rather, it is my understanding that California
Courts usually consult Common Law to determine final meaning.  Am I correct, or???
thank you.
james

181
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Karambit Vs. straight blades
« on: May 23, 2008, 11:04:12 AM »
Quote
If the LEO doesn't like the answer, tell him, "too bad, etc."

How about maybe taking a deep breath and stating your case instead?

Quote
The original officer was a fool to waste my time and I told him so in no uncertain terms in front of his Sargent and everyone else.

Nothing like antagonizing a LEO to get your point across. Was that really necessary?

Quote
He was a simply stupid and/or on a power trip.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you seem a bit bent on proving your point to "clueless" cops. Perhaps you know the law and should be commended for that, but being abrasive about it tends to hinder smooth resolution.

SB-Mig

I did state my case; he didn't like it. 

As for "clueless cops" isn't that a scary thought?  Isn't it their job to be clued in to the law before they assert authority?
I mean they are public servants and all...  Note, I find most cops to be intelligent, hardworking, and polite; I respect them.  But "clueless cops" arrogant cops?  Sorry I have absolutely no respect for clueless/stupid people who abuse authority. 

Crafty,
I will do my best.

California Penal Code 653k       Legal knife stuff.  But note, no mention of length; any length is therefore ok.  Dirks, daggers, fixed blades, folders etc. are legal.  Switchblades, cane knives, etc. are illegal.

California Penal Code 12020     Street Carry Laws...Fixed blades must be openly carried; note any possible weapon, i.e. a screwdriver carried concealed can be considered a dagger and you could be in violation.  Non switchblade pocket knives that are in the closed position can legally be carried concealed or open carry.

California Penal Code 626.10    Basically, don't carry a knife K-12.  However on a college campus while you may not carry a fixed blade, you may carry a folder of any length.

Los Angeles City Ordinance     I am sorry, I don't know the Ordinance, but I do know that LA prohibits open carry (and remember State Law says no concealed carry for a fixed blade) of ANY knife over 3".  This would include folders.  However, if you carry your folder 100% concealed, and it is over 3", this would seem to be legal but...

NOTE, nowhere in any CA Law (in contrast to some other states) is INTENT mentioned.  Intent is not an issue until you use the knife; but that is a whole other discussion.

Crafty, I hope the above helps.

james

182
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Karambit Vs. straight blades
« on: May 22, 2008, 08:23:03 PM »

Maxx:

The issue is whether your intent is for it to be a weapon.  IF IT IS, then X, Y, and Z follow.

CD

Actually, INTENT is irrelevant.  There is nothing wrong with telling a LEO that my intent
is "self defense"', period.  Forget the silly excuses, the seatbelts, etc.; tell the truth,
you have the knife for "self defense".  There is nothing wrong with that in CA.  Just use
it wisely.

If the LEO doesn't like the answer, tell him, "too bad, etc."; that's the CA State Law.  LEO's,
and I like most LEO's but they tend to have a power trip; however if you know the law all they can
do if huff and puff.  I hate being told what to do when that person doesn't know what they
are talking about.

I was at Long Beach Courthouse last week.  The Sheriff at the door said my folder was too
long (I declared it) and he was going to confiscate it .  Bullshit; Long Beach has no City Ordinance and
State Law says I can carry a folder of any length.  I asked for the desk Sargent; he looked it up
and agreed.  I admit an apology was not forthcoming, but it should have been.  The original officer was
a fool to waste my time and I told him so in no uncertain terms in front of his Sargent and everyone else.
He was a simply stupid and/or on a power trip.

The key; know the law and note, each City might be different;
LA for example has a 3" limit on exposed blades (all fixed knives must be exposed).
But INTENT is never an issue.

james

183
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Karambit Vs. straight blades
« on: May 22, 2008, 07:06:38 AM »
Of course legal issues apply here.

The PD solution has much to recommend it technically, but apart from LEOs and military in the field, what jurisdiction allows civilians to legally carry one?

Actually, a PD is quite legal in California, however the knife, like all fixed blades must be carried
exposed; it cannot be concealed.  Also, note certain cities have length limits, i.e. Los Angeles
is 3".  Now whether a PD is a good choice for self defense, I don't have an opinion.

As for another point, "why" you are carrying the knife, assuming it is carried exposed and meets
length limits etc. is not a legal issue in California.  My answer to a Leo can be to cut to
my cigars, cut rope, or simply "self defense".  Leo's do't like "self defense", but "use" is not relevant.

184
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Yoga
« on: May 23, 2007, 09:39:08 AM »
Maija said, "I tell you, when you get over 30 the warrenty runs out and then over 40
you gatta use it or lose it..."  I don't like the implications now that I am 50  :-)

Sting said, "I challenged the popular notion that yoga is a superior method for increasing youth
and maintaining the body over time". 

I don't know about "increasing youth", Ponce de Leon and I am still looking for that fountain,
but having played competitive tennis in college, run marathons, been a gym rat, in the
last few years I have found yoga to be truly beneficial.  I have never been so limber,
my knees don't hurt anymore, (I used to fence and still practice lunges) and I actually feel
light on my feet and balanced.  Oddly, my legs  are stronger than ever and the amount of weight I can push is
nearly the same or more.   And for my age, my speed is excellent.  I am not saying yoga is a panacea,
but I will contend that it is an excellent workout, especially if combined with a little aerobic exercise.
Further, as pointed out by krait44, while I have high blood presuure (bad genes and stress?) Tai Chi
and Yoga have been proven to be of benefit.  And, while I happen to be a hot yoga advocate (you
can stretch a lot better versus being in a cold environment) one of the benefits of yoga (and Tai Chi) is that
it can be done anywhere, by yourself, with little or no cost or needed equipment.  Maybe it's
not for everyone, but truly it does have a place.
james

185
Martial Arts Topics / Re: June 2007 Gathering
« on: May 21, 2007, 06:37:58 PM »
I have no doubt that Lynn is "up for the job".  In a real knife fight,
where strength and power are not as relevent as speed and
ability, Lynn might be able to take on all comers.  I don't know
the answer, each "solution" creates new problems, but to watch
people continue to kick their opponent when in a true knife fight they
wouldn't have a leg left, or they close and push and punch or actually
do a takedown after their arms, legs, neck etc. has been cut to ribbons
turns these fights into boxing/wrestling matches.  Unfortunately,
Lynn, or anyone slightly built is at a disadvantage at a Gathering,
yet in reality, the slightly built person has an advantage using the knife.
Perhaps in stick "grappling happens" although I wonder without a helmet
how many takedowns there would, but a knife is fatal - you don't charge
and take cut after cut and keep kicking and continue to close.  You're dead.

It is too bad good, subtle, deceptive and fast knife work cannot be rewarded.
Instead, the opponent after they are supposedly dead or disabled continues or initiates
physical harm through greater size or strength and is often is looked upon as the "winner". 
That is not reality.   Change the rules?
james

186
Martial Arts Topics / Re: Knife vs. Gun
« on: April 07, 2007, 09:04:29 AM »
"I was in fear of my life and used what force I had to".  I don't get it. 
In CA if you didn't "see the knife out of his pocket in his hand"
and he is merely "running up to you like a madman" and you shoot him,
he may be dead, but you will go to prison with his friends for maybe 20+.
That's not self defense; that's murder.  Actually, if you don't see the drawn knife and
you draw your gun you probably have committed a crime by displaying excess force.

And if you shoot him, well as I said, you are the one doing time and his
family will collect your house and other assets.  As a side note, it is legal
to carry a folded folding knife nearly anywhere in CA; by definition therefore there is
no "perceived lethal threat"; are we to assume in this scenario that the other other guy (you)
has a CCW permit, something very difficult to obtain in CA? 

If not, let me get this straight; you are going to shoot someone with an illegal
weapon who is committing no crime other than waving his arms and making a fist
and "running up to you like a madman" who may have a folding knife that you
have not seen open?  Unless they find his body with an open knife, as I said, maybe 20+.

I think stealth is one of the advantages of the knife; it can be hidden and given the scenario and
most scenario's the gun is exposed.  In reality the average man with the gun needs to think twice
before he draws and shoots.  We are not in Iraq, nor in most instances are we law enforcement. 
Therefore, a decisions needs to be made; is lethal force justified and later will it be
justified before twelve?  Tough to do in CA.  Yes, I know, "better to judged by twelve, than..." but
prison is not a great place to spend my remaining years either. 
james

187
Martial Arts Topics / Zacarias Moussaoui is guilty!
« on: April 28, 2006, 09:24:00 AM »
I am not an attorney: still while no one can support Moussaoui and note I do support capital punishment, I question the use of capital punishment in the matter of one being an ACCESSORY to murder before (or after) the fact.  Off hand, I can't think of any examples of capital punishment being applied to an individual who was only an accessory to murder and was not present at the crime nor was he/she the instigator of the crime.  In this instance, it does seem like the sole purpose of capital punishment is to "placate the bloodthirsty."

188
Martial Arts Topics / "Kali" player on trial for killing bouncer
« on: March 21, 2005, 10:40:01 AM »
Hi Crafty,

Citations; no, not offhand (I will reseach) but the law in CA (LA City and a few other cities have different rules) only address certain issues, such as  items like switch blades, pen knives, cane/swords etc. being illegal.  And the issue of open or concealed carry; for example fixed blades MUST be carried open carry while folders may be carried concealed if in the closed position (makes sense to me; do you want an open folder in your pocket?).      

The issue of use is not addressed - only whether the knife is legal or not.  If questioned, the officer must state why your/this particular knife is illegal, i.e. switchblade, a fixed blade being concealed, etc.  For basic reading see Penal Code sections 12020, 653(k), and 626.9 for a basic summary.  

We spoke of this once before.  I gave you the example of going to the LA Superior Courthouse with a folder.  At the door I declared it of course and asked that it be check in (downtown offers that service)  The rent a cop at the door said he was going to take it away since I told him it was for self defense; even the Sheriff at check in agreed with him!  However, the Sargent on the desk upstairs pulled 653(k) and read it noting to everyone that my knife was perfectly legal and the reason I carried my knife to be irrelevant.

Recently I was on a college campus and was "arrested" by campus police for carrying my folder.  It took a while but I pointed out that CA law states that you may not carry any knife on a K-12 campus and that you may not carry a fixed blade on a college campus however by ommision my folder was perfectly legal.  The Pasadena DA's office confirmed my opinion to the "arresting" officers.

I suggest that individual's should know the law.  Often times Sheriff and Police often do not and unless you explain the law to them (politely) you may have a problem.  But you should not be afraid to carry; just use the knife responsibly and appropriately.  And what that means is for the jury to decide.

james

189
Martial Arts Topics / "Kali" player on trial for killing bouncer
« on: March 21, 2005, 08:56:27 AM »
Crafty,  while I 100% agree that the killing of "Tiny" was profoundly sad,
I would like to dispute one comment of yours.  You said, "...but if NY is anything like CA law the carrying of a knife as a weapon is illegal but it is ok to carry it as a tool.".  I think we have had this discussion before, but unlike some states, CA law does not address the issue of use.   For example I carry a folder (by the way, any length according to CA law is ok) in the closed position.  This is perfectly legal AND I may honestly tell (politely) anyone from law enforcement who might inquire that the primary purpose of this weapon is self defense.  I can honestly say, "It is not a screwdriver, can opener, or box cutter; I carry it solely for the purpose of self defense."  Now,  while he/she may not like that answer, but it is perfectly legal in CA.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4]