Student arrested for refusing to be searched (Empty Holster)

[speedsix]

...having read the OP, I'm not missing anything...but not being there, I can't speak as to why he was singled out...could be that his actions made them want to be sure he was unarmed...still a reasonable search in my opinion...
...he wasn't arrested for refusing the search...but for refusing to leave...probably a valid arrest...and that's not hinging on the holster...I'd love to read that police report...a lot we're not getting here...SOMETHING made them "pick on" him...

"SOMETHING made them "pick on" him"
You inadvertently nullified your argument for a valid arrest if he was the only protester ordered to leave. He was indeed picked out for doing something completely legal. I don't buy all the arguments for any search that is not justified. We've been chipping away at our liberties to the point even LEO's feel justifed in defying the 4th amendment. We have surrendered to new speak. A frisk is not a search. How absurd. That's like saying a grope is not a sexual assualt. I am not blaming them, we've been sliding down this slope a long time. At every level government has taken our liberty in the name of some cause for the good of all. Airport security measures come to mind as one of the most extreme, yet we comply and it will become the norm and when more extreme measures are demanded we'll complain and then after a while "normal" is at a new level. JMHO

...without more facts, we don't know why they chose him out of the crowd to be suspicious of...in a crowd full of holster wearers(doing something completely legal)...he may have been making comments, acting angry and out of the usual...but he did something to cause them to notice him out of the crowd..."pick on" was in quotes to show sarcasm..."pick him out" would be the literal phrase...since he was singled out...there must have been a reason...and that reason, properly articulated in court, will show a judge why they wanted to frisk him...why he alarmed them when obviously none of the other holster wearers did...the fact that he was the only one ordered to leave has nothing to do with the validity of the arrest...each action by a person is evaluated independent of the crowd by the judge who hears the case...a lot of people know little of the nuts and bolts of the LEOs work...and don't understand things like Terry searches and searches because this is in view or that is seen...but this is the way it's been done for almost 40 years...and it's worked pretty well...
...as the facts come out, I'll bet we'll have a lot better insight into why him out of a crowd...

[Hoi Polloi]

I thought it was established earlier it was NOT during an empty holster protest, as was initially thought, but was a week prior and on the occasion of an Ann Coulter visit to campus?

He was protesting her, holding up a sign personally denigrating her, and wearing an empty holster, unlike anyone else present. Did that get re-reversed later? Am I remembering incorrectly?

[speedsix]

...went back and re-read the newspaper article...you're right...though there were other protesters, it doesn't say they were wearing open holsters...I missed that...and there's why he stuck out in the crowd and got their attention...at least partly that...we'll see as it plays out...

[Keith B]

I thought it was established earlier it was NOT during an empty holster protest, as was initially thought, but was a week prior and on the occasion of an Ann Coulter visit to campus?

He was protesting her, holding up a sign personally denigrating her, and wearing an empty holster, unlike anyone else present. Did that get re-reversed later? Am I remembering incorrectly?

Well, shoot; that is just a whole 'nother kettle of fish. In the words of SNL's Emily Litella, 'Never mind'.

[Oldgringo]

OTOH, if he was merely seeking attention, he succeeded in gettin' some.

Eight pages later:

What has the scoundrel had to say in his defense? You know, the minority guy who was arrested, what has he had to say about this perceived miscarriage of justice?

[C-dub]

“(Officers) asked if they could search him for a weapon, and even offered to take him away from the rest of the crowd so he wouldn’t be embarrassed by that, but he refused,” Lane said. “They asked him several times if they could do that, and he continued to refuse, so at that point they asked him to leave for the evening, and he refused to do that as well. This went back and forth several times until they finally decided that there was no sense in continuing the argument, so he was arrested.”

Again, I will point out that he was not ordered to leave. So, unless it can be proven that he had done something illegal or incriminating to warrant the attention, I think the officers made something out of nothing and should have left him alone.

EDIT: Unless, of course, the author of the article has this wrong and he was ordered to leave. This is also possible, but not what we have to go on.

[MasterOfNone]

“(Officers) asked if they could search him for a weapon, and even offered to take him away from the rest of the crowd so he wouldn’t be embarrassed by that, but he refused,” Lane said. “They asked him several times if they could do that, and he continued to refuse, so at that point they asked him to leave for the evening, and he refused to do that as well. This went back and forth several times until they finally decided that there was no sense in continuing the argument, so he was arrested.”

Again, I will point out that he was not ordered to leave. So, unless it can be proven that he had done something illegal or incriminating to warrant the attention, I think the officers made something out of nothing and should have left him alone.

EDIT: Unless, of course, the author of the article has this wrong and he was ordered to leave. This is also possible, but not what we have to go on.

I suspect you may be taking the author's words too literally. "asked to leave" is often used as a nice was of indicating that someone was ordered to leave. I'm sure I've seen many cop shows in which cops order someone to leave, then in the interview they say "we asked him to leave."

[gigag04]

I'm officially done with this thread.

[Oldgringo]

I'm officially done with this thread.

Me too.

[Keith B]

I'm officially done with this thread.

Me too.

I would be, but I still have to moderate.

[suthdj]

Below are from the comments at the news story these post are under the guys name but cant say they are really his comments.

K Michael Richards wrote on Apr 4, 2011 11:25 AM:

" I wish people would have the nerve to post their actual names if what they say is what they truly believe in. I am not starving for attention with my holster. I am engaging in Empty Holster Protest 2011 which hundreds if not thousands of students will be wearing their holsters practicing symbolic speech to raise awareness to the horrible policy of gun free campuses for citizens and not criminals. "




K Michael Richards wrote on Apr 3, 2011 11:55 AM:

" The search was not random and the uw police know my affiliation with Student for Concealed Carry on Campus advocating LEGAL carry on campus which to them must mean I am breaking school policy by bringing a concealed firearm on campus and have been targeting with special treatment because of it. I'm not intimidated and will continue to wear my holster during Empty Holster Protest 2011 despite their threats.
P.S. Meg Lanker is part of the group and supports the cause for people who have concealed firearms permit. "



K Michael Richards wrote on Apr 3, 2011 11:27 AM:

" First, I was not attempting to intimidate anyone. The wearing of an empty holster was my form of symbolic speech protected under the 1st Amendment and the specific wearing of a holster for symbolic speech has already been protected by federal courts. Sorry AJ but I am not a rightwing radical. Sorry you feel that way about a person who want the rights stated in the Bill of Rights and that an empty holster is dangerous. You seem to be the ignorant one here. I never found out about any threats until after my arrest. "

[srothstein]

I'm officially done with this thread.

And I apologize for having it degenerate as far as it did. My point, which I guess was not clear, was a disagreement between two reasonable people on whether or not an empty holster justified a frisk or not. It was not intended as any type of comment on your policing abilities, just an academic discussion on suspicion.

[Shoot Straight]

" First, I was not attempting to intimidate anyone. The wearing of an empty holster was my form of symbolic speech protected under the 1st Amendment

It's nice to see a college student standing up for rights that are enumerated in the U.S. Constitution, as opposed to the socialists who think they have a "right" to force others to work (slavery) so the socialists can have "free" stuff without working.

[gigag04]

I'm officially done with this thread.

And I apologize for having it degenerate as far as it did. My point, which I guess was not clear, was a disagreement between two reasonable people on whether or not an empty holster justified a frisk or not. It was not intended as any type of comment on your policing abilities, just an academic discussion on suspicion.

I didnt read anything posted in the thread as a comment about me or my work. No worries there. It just got to the point where I felt it was going in circles.