A Twitter discussion earlier tonight between our friends @eyeonannapolis, @baltospectator, and @justin_fenton pointed to @bob_smithey's Tumblr blog. Posted on 06/08/2011 9:13:59 PM PDT by jeffq73
A Twitter discussion earlier tonight between our friends @eyeonannapolis, @baltospectator, and @justin_fenton pointed to @bob_smithey's Tumblr blog.
The blog post in question contains an image, found below at the bottom of this post, of an Intelligence Bulletin from the Baltimore PD's Criminal Intelligence Division. The bulletin, dated May 31, 2011, shows a picture of a window decal (seen at the top of this post) sold by Legally Concealed, a company that also sells a line of clothing and accessories with this same logo on it.
The bulletin points out in big red letters that:
All officers should be familiar with this symbol especially when dealing with the public or conducting traffic stops. While the individual who is displaying the symbol may not be armed , the presence of the symbol provides an early warning indicator that you MAY be about to encounter an armed individual.As noted on the bulletin, and pointed out by Fenton on Twitter, the source of the information in this bulletin is the WRTAC. That acroynym stands for the Washington Regional Threat and Analysis Center, which provides a daily open source intelligence briefing. The Washington Post discussed the WRTAC in their heralded investigative series Top Secret America.
Legally Concealed appears to be a part of the National Rifle Association's Business Alliance and has no appearance of being a fringe website at all. It is interesting that the WRATC and Baltimore PD find this information newsworthy enough to inform law enforcement officers about it. As the son of a career police officer, I would hope smart officers would go into every traffic stop thinking about the possibility of there being a gun in the car.
In fact, people who have gone to the trouble of going through all the legal process and have standards to meet and maintain to hold on to that concealed weapons permit are, in almost every case, the least of the worries of a police officer in Baltimore City. Additionally, as someone who took a concealed weapons training course in another state, there was instruction given on interactions with law enforcement. I specifically remember being told to verbally tell the officer and hand over your concealed permit along with your license, registration and insurance information when stopped.
The city police department in Baltimore at times seems obsessed on how many guns they've taken off the streets rather than criminals who possess those guns illegally. Those are the people the law enforcement officers needs to worry about far more than law-abiding concealed weapons holders. This may not be intended as profiling of concealed weapons permit holders, but it certainly smacks of that very thing. I have to assume the WRTAC has been passing this information on to law enforcement officers in the whole Mid-Atlantic region and I'm sure law enforcement in Maryland might not be as accustomed to this type of thing since Maryland does not have "shall issue" weapons permits like other states. The Maryland law is the old system (I saw it with a family member getting a permit in another state that now has shall issue) where political favoritism and law enforcement cronyism are the only reliable way to get a permit to protect yourself.
I would expect all the brainpower assembled in the original Twitter conversation, especially Justin Fenton, might get to the bottom of this as well as anybody might in the coming days. Maybe it is just a well-intentioned, but misguided, effort to keep law enforcement informed but, to reiterate something I already said, the firearms owned by a concealed weapons permit holder are probably the last firearms a Baltimore City Police Officer has a major cause for concern over. Specifically, the smaller number of permits out there due to the state not being shall issue cuts down on the numbers of permit holders in addition to the unlikely possibility of a permit holder being a threat. What's next - an intelligence bulletin telling officers to watch out for people with NRA stickers on their cars?
The image of the intelligence bulletin provided by @bob_smithey is below.
Figuratively speaking, of course.
If that doesn't work. You may need to consider taking up arms to defend yourself.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Well, I have yet to be pulled over while CCW’ing. But, I’ll let y’all know how it goes.
(BTW, I hardly ever get pulled over -I drive like a grandpaw!)
I called yesterday morning. Spoke with someone in the Intelligence Section who had no idea that CCW holders went through a background check. When I told him that notices such as #12 make the Dept appear unprofessional, he got upset. Said he would not have a statement to make. I told him I wasn’t asking for one and hung up.
Since you seem to be interested in rhetoric and were kinda-sorta polite with your last question "What makes your blanket assertion any more accurate than mine?", I'll explain for you: The difference is that I didn't make a blanket assertion, you did.
I specifically allowed that there might well be regional differences, and even qualified my statement with the (not terribly obscure)YMMV, specifically recognizing that your own experience might be different.
"Like I said, YMMV, and no doubt regional differences come into play in a state as large as Cali..."
In contrast, you wrote "CA cops are notorious for harassing CCW holders at traffic stops", which casts a rather wide net.
Can't speak to the experience in SF, as whenever I've had occasion to roll through that benighted burg the pipes were legal, and whatever vehicle code violations I may have committed escaped the notice of the local constabulary. I will, however, keep your advice in mind on my next ride through there. So, thanks for that, at least.
So you're going to just stop living a normal healthy life because you might be targeted at some future date? How shall ye be targeted? Let me count the ways. I guarantee you will at some point become of interest to a government interested in oppression of the public IF:
You've ever been in the military, especially the combat arms and as a leader (officer or NCO). Heck they're probably going to lump boyscouts in here, too as potential survivalists.
If you subscribe to any outdoor magazines or gun mags or have a hunting and or fishing license.
If you subscribe to any military or military history oriented magazine. OR Soldier of Fortune lol.
If you drive a 4x4 vehicle
If you hold season tickets to one or more contact sports venues.
If you belong to any church deemed evangelical or fundamentalist.
If your "NetFlix" or "ON DEMAND" lists feature a list of "action intense" movies.
There are a TON of ways to determine if you present a future threat to an oppressive government. These are but a few of the ones most obvious -- I'm sure you can think of more. The point is, do you drop and crawl now to kiss the Massas boot or do you say FU and live life as you please with your chin up, shoulders squared and eyes on the future, unafraid?
I disagree, profoundly. There was a time when my 2nd Amendment bumperstickers (including both my NRA Life and Instructor decals) clearly discouraged a pair of cretins from robbing an all night gas station and convenience store in the middle of nowhere, FL. The local cops, agreed, afterward.
Maryland police will not accept your out-of-state Concealed Carry permit, even if you are an off-duty or going-to-duty police officer or federal contractor who has a Q clearance if you tell them that you have it loaded in the glove-compartment.
You can bet if I were an officer in a jurisdiction outside Maryland and I came across a Maryland officer carrying they would get the same courtesy they extend to out of state officers.
Yup. I have no intention of removing my NRA Life member mylar day-glo sticker or my INSTRUCTOR decals (front and rear) or my big SIG SAUER oval on the back bumper.
I don’t know about Indiana, but here in Cali the CHP (our version of the statie/state trooper/state department of public safety etc) is primarily interested in writing tickets. It’s what they do. They’ll ticket anyone they can: cops, grandmothers, other off-duty CHP officers (no kidding) etc etc etc. They are tasked, in other words, with vehicle code enforcement, and can be, and are, subject to “corrective interviews” with the sergeant and lieutenant if they get mixed up in too many penal code issues. I imagine it’s pretty similar in your state.
And you have one plausible narrative, but strictly as an outsider, it’s also plausible that she didn’t actuate her turn indicator, — or turn it on soon enough? (perhaps distracted by a phone call? — Not saying it’s so, just that it’s plausible). That the statie decided to make the stop and then ran the plate? And then found out that the driver was indeed the CCW holder and, just as in my example — let her off with a warning.
OK, so that’s a bit of Roshomon, but there’s not enough evidence either way — maybe the guy did make an illegal traffic stop, lacking PC — his dash camera would tell the tale. Just sayin’ that there’s another way to look at it given the facts presented.
I don’t know about Indiana, but here in Cali the CHP (our version of the statie/state trooper/state department of public safety etc) is primarily interested in writing tickets. It’s what they do. They’ll ticket anyone they can: cops, grandmothers, other off-duty CHP officers (no kidding) etc etc etc. They are tasked, in other words, with vehicle code enforcement, and can be, and are, subject to “corrective interviews” with the sergeant and lieutenant if they get mixed up in too many penal code issues. I imagine it’s pretty similar in your state.
And you have one plausible narrative, but strictly as an outsider, it’s also plausible that she didn’t actuate her turn indicator, — or turn it on soon enough? (perhaps distracted by a phone call? — Not saying it’s so, just that it’s plausible). That the statie decided to make the stop and then ran the plate? And then found out that the driver was indeed the CCW holder and, just as in my example — let her off with a warning.
OK, so that’s a bit of Roshomon, but there’s not enough evidence either way — maybe the guy did make an illegal traffic stop, lacking PC — his dash camera would tell the tale. Just sayin’ that there’s another way to look at it given the facts presented.
Cool story. There is just one problem. If your son was a Federal Police Officer authorized to carry, then he can carry nationwide, regardless of what Maryland says about it. (Supremacy Doctrine.) Second, HR 218 exempts all LEOS (Local, State or Federal) from State Laws regarding concealed weapons, regardless of what Maryland (or any other State) says about it.
So you see, things simply aren’t adding up here.
I think that's a little bit of an extreme view on it. I personally won't put any stickers of any kind on my vehicles, it looks trashy in my humble opinion.
However, these tags can serve a purpose the same as the sticker at Hardees stating employees don't have access to the safe.
the other part of this is that some folks just like to be part of something, some sort of club... being a gun owner is something to be proud of even though I disagree about advertising the fact you are carrying. Carrying it on your hip in the open isn't much different than having a sticker on your window really. that's just my own humble opinion.
Will criminals take note of the sticker when they are looking for their next carjacking victim? I'd say that's a big maybe, but I don't necessarily think it makes someone "too stupid to have a permit" by any stretch.
Gee...they’ll REALLY lose their minds if they see the “2” flag right next to a “III Percenter” flag..
F*** em. Damn jackboots.
If we are the call ourselves FREE MEN, we need to start ACTING like Free Men.
really...
You’re saying if I do not have an identifying decal or other symbology identifying me as a supporter of the 2nd Amendment and that I am probably carrying a firearm, legally or not...
I am not responsible???
Please clarify...
What I’m saying is I’d be less worried about someone who says up front that “I went through the trouble of becoming certified to carry and have a legally obtained firearm” than I would making a random stop and finding someone I don’t know who has a firearm. Doesn’t make the latter a bad guy but I’m guessing the odds are much greater. Which situation would make you more nervous (as cop approaching a stopped car)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.