why do so many come in here and BASH COPS

[TRICKSTER]

Maybe if our laws here in California were a little more in line with the rest of the country, we would not see said bashing...

That would only make sense if cops wrote the laws.

[yzErnie]

In what world is "not made public" not a synonym for "secret"?

The results are not secret as many people know the results. They are simply not broadcast on the 6pm news.

[KaTooM]

That would only make sense if cops wrote the laws.

Good point, maybe we just tend to take it out on the Cops because of our crazy laws. I must admit, the last person I want to meet at the range is a Cop, even though I am in full complience of the law.(AR-15 OLL BB 10 round mags Evil features)

Just another wedge between law abiding folks and good Cops.

[J-cat]

Why?

He can't do anything to you without PC.

[KaTooM]

Why?

He can't do anything to you without PC.

One I'll informed officer, and you and your lawyer could need to prove it...$$$$$

He may not even know what a BB is...I didnt until I found this site.

I was at Angeles today and the old timers next to me were talking all types of FUD. I approched them and tried to give them the scoop. I told them about OLL and the mag lock...there responce was maybe you should paint your rifle pink.

[Steveo8]

Always remember, if you project negativity, it shuts down lines of communicaton.

I argee with you Ron, but please remeber that it works both directions.

[J-cat]

One I'll informed officer, and you and your lawyer could need to prove it...$$$$$

He may not even know what a BB is...I didnt until I found this site.

I was at Angeles today and the old timers next to me were talking all types of FUD. I approched them and tried to give them the scoop. I told them about OLL and the mag lock...there responce was maybe you should paint your rifle pink.

You don't understand. He needs PC to take your gun. He has none when you are shooting your AR at the range. He would need to run the SN to see it is not registered. Cops can't just walk onto a range and start running SN's.

[ST5MF]

FYI PC = "Probable Cause."

The fact you are in a public range with a "questionable" rifle does not exclude someone from being questioned by an LEO. If the weapon is in the trunk of your car and there is no reason to stop or search your vehicle then PC would apply.

Is it right, perhaps not. Don't make the mistake of thinking you can't be questioned or that a LEO can't pee-pee in your cheerios. They most certainly can and often WILL if given the opportunity.

BTW I have many friends who shoot their legally registered so called "assault-weapons" at public ranges and they have been questioned by none other than CADOJ. Believe me they will not hesitate to crawl up your a** at a moments notice. A lot of these guys live in the pursuit to ruin lives. If you give them the opportunity they most certainly have no problems kicking in your door in the middle of the night if you dont ABIDE.

California is not the place to test the limits of gun laws.

[J-cat]

Just because they have been questioned does not mean they had to entertain the questions.

[ST5MF]

Just because they have been questioned does not mean they had to entertain the questions.

In a public place discharging your rifle? Believe me, an LEO can if he so desires question you. As far as not entertaining him. If you aren't an LEO yourself you will more than likely loose that battle.

Might makes right has never been a truer statement.

Not saying it is fair or even right, just saying you will loose in this scenario...

[J-cat]

You are discharging a rifle in a place where it is specifically allowed by the penal code. The cop cannot do squat to you unless the rifle is obviously illegal, i.e. silencer, short barrel, automatic fire, etc.

[Hopi]

California is not the place to test the limits of gun laws.

If you don't mind....I'm going to grab this as a sigline....

[Ron-Solo]

As I understand it, you don't get a choice of when your court date is, so night court is not really an option for a traffic offense. The written declaration thing seems to be a CA innovation, and a pretty good one. Is this something widely known, or something you have to just know about?

Hi Bob,

Most LA County courts have night traffic court on a regular scheduled basis and the date is written on the cite when given. It is only available for infractions. Some courts it is weekly, while others are monthly. With the current budget crisis, it may go away, which is unfortunate.

The written declaration varies by court, and you usually have to make a special request. It is not commonly used for moving violations but is common for parking violations.


Traffic court is always set for when the majority of people are at work. I did not mean to imply it was set for the convenience of LE, only that it is virtually always inconvenient for the guy trying to contest a ticket.

Unless you work day shift and have weekends off, it is also inconvient for the officer too

It may seem to some that those mechanisms don't work especially well. Its hard to tell from the outside looking in if they work or not because most LEAs are pretty secretive about their disciplinary system, and it often appears to be a system that is oriented primarily to clearing the officers involved in questionable activities. It probably is not that bad, but you must admit that appearances are important to public opinion and a system that operates in secrecy is not one that will ever have wide faith from the public. People are pretty cynical these days and its not too surprising that regardless of reality, people will never truly trust a system that investigates itself.

We have the same rights as anyone else and are innocent until proven guilty, which some people often forget. Like many professions, personnel matters are private issues and any discipline matters are not released. This is common in the private sector also. You'd be plesantly surprized how complete internal investigations are. Our Department, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, also has an independent review process for all investigations.

Not made public is NOT the same as 'secret' in this area. The release of this information requires a court hearing and the party wanting the information has to show a legitimate need for the information, not just wanting to know. These protections are guaranteed by the Peace Officers Bill of Rights, (PBOR) which is California law.

[ST5MF]

You are discharging a rifle in a place where it is specifically allowed by the penal code. The cop cannot do squat to you unless the rifle is obviously illegal, i.e. silencer, short barrel, automatic fire, etc.

J-CAT I agree with you whole heartedly. However, logic and reason don't always apply. Many in the CADOJ don't have a clue of the laws they themselves are intrusted to enforce. This is why Cali is in a perpetual state of lunacy when it comes to this stuff.

Don't think you will get into a pissing contest with a LEO in a public place with a firearm and win. The LEO can be an 80yr old geriatric women; you will loose in a pissing contest every time bro.

[SVT-40]

In what world is "not made public" not a synonym for "secret"?

If you file a formal written complaint against an officer in Calif you will get a letter stating the findings of the investigation. What you will not receive is any information regarding what discipline if any the officer would receive or received.

The results could be:

1. "Unfounded" Defined as. The investigation clearly established that
the allegation is not true.

2. "Exonerated" Defined as. The investigation clearly established that the actions of the peace officer that formed the basis for the complaint are not violations of law or department policy.

3. "Not sustained" Defined as. The investigation is not able to clearly establish that the actions of the peace officer that formed the basis for the complaint are violations of law or departmental policy.

4. "sustained" Defined as. The investigation clearly established that the actions of the peace officer that formed the basis for the complaint are violations of law or department policy.

These findings must be mailed to the original complaining party within thirty days of the COMPLETION of the investigation.

Basically all a complaining party would receive is a letter stating one of the above four possible outcomes to the investigation. The letter would look something like this.

Dear Mr. Jones

The investigation into your complaint of the actions of Officer Smith on May 15 2008 is completed. The allegation were ( insert one of the above listed results).

Thank you, Chief heavy bottom Bum Phuck P. D.




For additional information see Penal codes PC 832.5 & PC 832.7 These codes spell out some of the procedures used in complaints against LEO's.

For more info check out What is known as the (POBOR) Peace officers bill of rights.
Sections 3300 through 3313 of the California Government Code.

There are also innumerable case decisions which come into play in relation to police officer disciplinary procedures. Far too many to delve into here.

for LEO collective bargaining information check out the (MMBA) Meyers Milias Brown Act .
Sections 3500 through 3511 of the California Government Code.


Dry but interesting reading.

I do have considerable expertise in relation to LEO complaints. I've acted as Officer council on many occasions when officers in my department had complaints against them, and had a few complaints against me. All mine were unfounded or I was exonerated I've also attended a few week long seminars related to POBOR issues as well as complaints against officers. Also being president of my POA I always had officers coming to me about complaints or internal issues.