TexasCHLforum.com

RiveraRa wrote:I live in Kyle so keep me updated and let me know if there is anything I can do.

CHL/LEO wrote:

Its been my experience that by the time it goes to court the LEO really has forgotten and will say anything to get the conviction.

For the life of me I can't figure some of you guys out. On this forum I try to address questions that members have submitted, and in doing so perhaps explain why another LEO took the actions he or she did. After I've done that lately it seems then that it all becomes a big conspiracy by LEOs to "tell lies" and "violate citizens rights". If you have question regarding CHL holders and their interactions with LEOs then this forum seems like a good place to post your questions. If you hate every member of the government, think that all LEOs are crooked and will do anything to frame innocent civilians while they continually conspire to figure out ways to violate your civil rights, then perhaps you need to voice those diatribes on another website. That's just my humble opinion as a CHL holder and member of this forum - not as a LEO.

From now on if someone has a specific question about something that happened in the City of Dallas, or that occurred with the Dallas Police Department, feel free to post it and I'll try and address it. You may not like the answers I give, or even agree with why our department does things the way we do. That's your choice, but be aware that arguing with a police officer on the side of the road about why you don't like his city's procedures or policies is probably not going to get you the response that you want.

That individual officer is only enforcing state or municipal laws that they've been directed to enforce. They didn't write the laws or codes and while they can't change them - they do have some leeway as to how they enforce them. There's a reason why the legislature left us that leeway in the Code of Criminal Procedures - not everyone has to or needs to be arrested.

I can not represent all 3,200+ officers on my department but I can give you a general overview of why things are, along with what and why I personally would take (or not take) certain actions. If those are helpful to you, or provide some insight into why we do things, then great. If not - then again that's your choice.

txmatt wrote:Just be glad you weren't stopped by a TPWD game warden. They are now asking for SSN on top of all that. Boy did that one get me into a sour mood, and I almost lost my cool when he asked for that.

hey CHL/LEO,

got a question for ya man. If you dont want to respond on the thread feel free to pm me. I don't want to stir the pot here either.

I am kind of curious though. Given that I think those questions are a violation of privacy AND I honestly don't want to offend a police officer much less be impolite with them what would you suggest would be the best way to get out of answering those questions without giving up that information but also without getting the officer's ire up while being respectful at the same time? I'm trying to find the words for that myself but I can't seem to think of what would be appropriate. Can you give me some ideas?

Women warn of 'nightmare' traffic stops in Irving

10:11 PM CDT on Thursday, July 3, 2008

By BRETT SHIPP / WFAA-TV

IRVING - Those driving down the road without an insurance card of driver's license with a correct address may find themselves in jail if they get pulled over by Irving police.

In fact, it happened to two women who were pulled over by the same two Irving cops last weekend. Both women said their traffic stops turned into a nightmare.

Mikki Stokes, of Irving, said she was headed to the store for some sour cream when she was stopped by two Irving police officers.

She was initially stopped for not making a complete stop when exiting the parking lot. Stokes second offense was that her current address was not on her Texas driver's license. However, she said she never dreamed that those two minor offenses would result in her being cuffed and stuffed into the backend of a squad car.

"And I was like, 'Is this something that someone with no criminal record would get arrested for, that's never been in trouble for anything [and] that's not a persistent offender?" she said. "I've never been in trouble before. Why are you arresting me for this? And they were like, 'We can arrest you for anything.'"

Two hours later it was Leanna Onstott, of Fort Worth, who became the next target of the same two officers.

"And he said, 'You are under arrest,'" she said of when she was pulled over without have proper proof of insurance in her car. "And he turned me around and put handcuffs on me and I was just like, 'Is this really happening? I mean, can they do this?'"

Onstott was originally pulled over for creeping her car past the pedestrian crossing line.

Neither woman had outstanding warrants or had ever been to jail. Yet, Stokes said she spent two hours behind bars. Onstott said she spent five hours in jail before posting a $600 bond. However, none of that was what Onstott said was the worst part of her arrest.

"They asked me to take off my clothes," she said.

Onstott was then forced to put on jail clothes.

Both women have filed internal affairs complaints against the two Irving officers Daniels and McPherson. While Irving police officials said their concerns are being taken seriously and will be thoroughly investigated, they also said the officers were within their rights to make the arrests.

"The discretion that was used, the decision to make the arrests, it's well within their authority to do that," said David Tull, with the Irving Police Department. ".... I don't know that you could say it's common, but it's not unheard of."

Regardless of how the investigation turns out, both women said their faith in Irving police has been shattered.

"I think if someone can't get them to stop abusing power and pulling people over and doing stuff like this because they think they have the right to, then they don't need to be in that job," Stokes said.

Onstott warned motorists that as long as officers can arrest whoever they want for what they want, Irving is not a desirable place to drive.

"I just want to know why they didn't give me a ticket," she said. "The public needs to know that it's happening and it could happen to them if it happened to me."

CHL/LEO wrote:

hey CHL/LEO,

got a question for ya man. If you dont want to respond on the thread feel free to pm me. I don't want to stir the pot here either.

I am kind of curious though. Given that I think those questions are a violation of privacy AND I honestly don't want to offend a police officer much less be impolite with them what would you suggest would be the best way to get out of answering those questions without giving up that information but also without getting the officer's ire up while being respectful at the same time? I'm trying to find the words for that myself but I can't seem to think of what would be appropriate. Can you give me some ideas?

It's not that big of a deal in our department. We just want their current home address and if they refuse to give a work address we (or at least I) would just write refused in the blank. Our department won't allow us to jail a person for traffic offenses unless there are multiple violations, and not even our traffic enforcement officers are going to want to take someone to jail over something silly like this.

Now that being said, I would not advise ever telling an officer "I don't have to give you that information" as lots of departments can jail you on just one traffic offense. Perhaps you saw the recent story regarding Irving PD and their policy of jailing traffic offenders:

Back when I was writing a lot of tickets I would have people tell me that they were "unemployed" or "self-employed" when I asked for that information. I didn't check (or care) whether that information was the truth or not - I just wrote it in and gave them their copies. I can assure you that telling a LEO that you're "self-employed" would go over a lot better with an officer than "I don't have to give you that information" would.

Henry Dearborn wrote:No free showers without the papers being properly filled out!

CHL/LEO wrote:

I can assure you that telling a LEO that you're "self-employed" would go over a lot better with an officer than "I don't have to give you that information" would.