NH: Seized by the Manchester Police for Open Carry (vanity)

Capt. xxxxxxxx, Public Integrity & Professional Standards, Manchester Police Department

I am writing to you in your capacity as head of Public Integrity and Professional Standards to lodge a complaint against your department and certain of your officers stemming from an incident that took place on Saturday, March 27 at about 9:00pm.

My wife and I had just finished our 11th anniversary dinner at Kobe Japanese Steakhouse on Second Street, and had stopped in to the Barnes & Noble bookstore on South Willow Street for a cup of latte and a few books and DVDs. I was dressed neatly in slacks and a purple oxford shirt, and was clean-shaven.

Due to the pleasant evening air, I left my coat in the car. Since I had neglected to tuck my shirt over it, my holstered Glock 30 sidearm was thus visible in the small of my back in a Workman IWB holster.

For about 10-15 minutes, I chatted with my wife about choosing a sweater from a selection of knitting books she was reviewing, browsed the history and political sections near the restroom, and then made my way over to the Science Fiction aisle.

I was idly leafing through an interesting book, minding my own business, when suddenly I found myself seized by the right shoulder and my holster, pushed towards the corner of the bookcase, by either Officer xxxxxxx or Officer xxxxxxx, I’m not absolutely certain which of them.

I exclaimed, raised my hands up to prevent myself from going face first into the bookshelf. I dropped the book, and upon glancing over my right shoulder, saw another uniformed officer at my right flank. The officer holding me requested that I relax and place my hands on my head. I immediately complied.

I was then disarmed, the holster being unsnapped and removed from my waistband. I informed the detective to whom the firearm was handed that it had a round in the chamber upon his inquiry. I believe the individual who unloaded it was one of the detectives, either xxxxxxx or xxxxxxx.

I was then asked to go outside the store with them, and I agreed. I was released and walked to the doorway, handing over my driver’s license and New Hampshire pistol license on the way out.

Once my record came back clear, naturally, I was subjected to a condescending lecture about the carrying of arms, quizzed repeatedly as to why I carry a firearm.

I replied “to protect myself and my family,”[1] which yielded a number of derisive comments about the effectiveness of firearms in self-defense and defense of others – hmm, why do cops carry them, I wonder? “We have to,” one of the detectives whined. They also lectured on liability issues, terrorism, and other such topics.

I informed them that I am trained, having completed the Lethal Force Institute’s Judicious Use of Deadly Force course, as well as handgun licensing requirements in California and for a Utah Concealed Carry license.

Given the crowd of talkative uniformed officers and detectives around me, and having been somewhat rattled by the ambush, I had difficulty finishing a sentence, and in hindsight I should probably have told them it was none of their damn business why I carry a firearm or whether I was trained.

After about 5-10 minutes of my polite endurance of various disrespectful and arrogant statements and questions by the officers and detectives, my firearm was returned to me, and I reloaded it and placed it back on my belt, this time tucked under my shirt. Upon completing a contact card with one of the officers, at his vehicle, I retrieved my coat, and returned to the store to find my wife.

At no time until, during, or after the officer laid his hands on me, was there any legal cause for his touching or restraining me.

The irrational alarm induced by the sight of my holstered handgun among those who called 911 aside, I was conducting myself in a calm and reasonable manner, merely browsing the books and minding my own business, occasionally chatting with my wife, not posing any threat or menace to anyone else in the store.

RSA 631:4, Criminal Threatening, does not apply as I was not engaging in any manner of physical conduct that purposely placed or attempted to place another in fear of imminent bodily injury or physical contact.

RSA 644:2, Disorderly Conduct, does not apply as I was not engaging in “violent, tumultuous, or threatening behavior,” either knowingly or purposefully. The open carrying of a firearm is not inherently threatening behavior, even when it makes someone from Massachusetts pee their pants and hyperventilate.

Unlike Illinois,[2] New York, or Washington, DC, where an openly carried firearm is prima facie evidence of a violation of the law, there is no New Hampshire statutory provision against open carry. In fact, it is a right guaranteed explicitly in the Constitution of the State.

Your officers should have enough experience and common sense to evaluate the totality of the circumstances – my attire, my demeanor, the fact that most armed criminals don’t carry openly, etc. – and take action on that basis, rather than on the basis of a paranoid fear of armed citizens which they evidently share with those who called upon them.

Given the fact that there was no violation of the law taking place or reasonably suspected when I was seized, the officer’s use of physical force was not authorized by law, and thus does not fall under the exemptions offered to public servants by this section of New Hampshire law.

The irrational concern expressed by others at the mere sight of a well-dressed individual openly carrying a firearm “near the children’s section” has no legal standing, and does not afford any credible justification. Another’s belief in “evil gun radiation” has no bearing on law or reality.

This statute provides that “[a] law enforcement officer is justified in using non-deadly force upon another person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes it necessary to effect an arrest or detention or to prevent the escape from custody of an arrested or detained person, unless he knows that the arrest or detention is illegal…”

Again, the officer should have known, and can reasonably be expected by a court and a jury to know, that there was no legal justification for seizing and detaining me under the laws of New Hampshire, and his detention of me was therefore illegal and unjustified.

My Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizure was violated, as there was no reasonable basis to believe, given the totality of circumstances and New Hampshire law, that a violation of the law was underway or planned before I was grabbed by the officer.

The seizure of my person under false and illegal pretenses, being ordered to place my hands on my head, and my being escorted from the store by a crowd of police officers had a clear and unmistakable tendency to expose me to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule[3] by all the patrons of the store who witnessed the incident, and by anyone who might read about the incident in the newspaper were it to be reported in the media’s usual breathless and inflammatory style.

I understand that your officers often face difficult, dangerous, and demanding situations, and that they must conduct themselves in such a way as to minimize the risk they face while carrying out their duties.

However, this necessity to minimize risk does not override the fundamental right guaranteed to all citizens of this State and Nation to be free from arbitrary exercise of the police power while lawfully going about their business.

If they had approached me, I would have greeted them politely. If they had requested that I tuck my shirt over my firearm due to the irrational concern expressed by other patrons of the store, I would have politely complied.

Even if they felt the need to have one officer sneak up behind me, ready to tackle me, while another officer engaged me in conversation, that would have been fine too.

But to have their first interaction with me be an ambush, to find myself grabbed and restrained for no justifiable reason while peaceably going about my business, is far beyond the pale. And to then be subjected to a condescending interrogation about my choice to exercise my fundamental human right to carry a firearm for the defense of myself and my family was even more irritating, in light of the fact that I’ve undergone about half a dozen federal background checks and fingerprinting in the process of obtaining my CCW cards.

Whether or not your officers and detectives realize it, and whether or not you even like it, the armed citizen in New Hampshire is your ally and friend in the endless struggle against dangerous criminals. We are part of the reason that the violent crime rate in New Hampshire (175.4 per thousand[4]) and Vermont (113.5 per thousand) is a fraction of that of Massachusetts (476.1 per thousand), a state where women living in a town with an at-large serial rapist must go begging to the police for pepper spray. Thomas Paine expressed this principle eloquently, saying:

“...arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. ... Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them; ...the weak will become a prey to the strong.”[5]

There are far too many instances – as I’m sure you are well aware – where the weak, deprived by law of effective tools for self-defense, have fallen prey to the strong, such as the Manchester high school girls who were brutally raped in recent weeks.

Just have a look at page A8 of the March 29 Union Leader, and every month, for crimes prevented or ameliorated by armed citizens.

Reflecting on the incident the following morning, I realized that I had forgotten Massad Ayoob’s point that sheep can’t tell the difference between the sheep-dog and the wolves, even though the sheep-dog would risk his life to save the sheep from hungry wolves.

I realize that some of the patrons of Barnes & Noble thought of me as a wolf, rather than a sheep-dog, and reacted accordingly by calling in the authorities. Needless to say, I will be careful to carry my firearm more discreetly in the future to avoid spooking the sheep.

I have not yet decided whether or not to file a lawsuit on the basis of the aforementioned violation of my rights and New Hampshire law. If I do, I will copy you on the service as a courtesy.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, Captain xxxxxxx. If you wish to discuss this matter further in a meeting, please feel free to contact me at the phone number indicated on the first page, or via e-mail at mvpel@yahoo.com, and we can arrange something.

[4] Federal Crime Statistics, 2000 - http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/macrime.htm http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/nhcrime.htm

[5] Thoughts On Defensive War, (1775) in 1 Writings of Thomas Paine, at 56, M. Conway ed

Oh we can defend ourselves. We are one of the few that can protect our property also. If I was a cop I would rather see a weapon but my trainer was a cop and he said "cops, do not like citizens armed and do not want to see your weapon"

I was fortunate that there was a uniformed officer to my right that I saw out of the corner of my eye, and I thought fast enough to not put an elbow in the face of a cop.

Or rake his shin/knee with the rear of your boot....

Isn't Vermont the 'Live Free or Die' state?

That's the NH state motto, although it should probably be "Live Free or Live in Massachusetts."

The irony is that the Mass. liberals that flee Mass. taxes get to NH and start barging into local government... "What do you meeeeaan there's no all-day kindergarten... I have to PAY to put Ashleigh and Ethan in day care? Let me tell you hayseeds, in Cambridge we -- "

Vermont is the original state that permits unrestricted concealed carry. ("Doan need not steenking permeets") Alaska has since signed on.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

but my trainer was a cop and he said "cops, do not like citizens armed and do not want to see your weapon"

Tough sh!t.

Cops exist to "protect and serve", not "intimidate and dominate".

If a cop cannot tolerate the sight of an armed and peaceable citizen, then he or she needs to find another job. Period.

As for "not seeing" your weapon, bonehead legislators have made it so that it many states, open carry is the only "legal" way to go.

Personally, I prefer going concealed, but I like our Right to open carry being recognized also.

Vermont is the original state that permits unrestricted concealed carry. ("Doan need not steenking permeets") Alaska has since signed on.

New Hampshire is about to be the third state to do so.

"..."cops, do not like citizens armed and do not want to see your weapon"

Which is why I do not trust cops, as well-meaning as they might be, as allies in the fight for our rights.

They'll (understandably) do anything possible to make their lives safer and easier (which makes one wonder why they became cops in the first place), and thus I do not assume that they are on our side.

Some of them also seem to simply want to remain an "exclusive club" of selected, superior armed citizen.

I might use this posters experience for a part in my story.

The names will be changed to protect the innocent Freeper.

I am writing the story a little bit everyday, I will rewrite, correct and add to anything that needs it.

I accept advice and critiques!

They do the same thing in Maine, and the New Yorkers are making a go of it in Florida.

They don't realize that it is THEIR OWN Leftist policies which create the situations they fled, and thus try to impose them on their new "paradise".

Pretty soon, they may run out of places to run to.

That was my point...what good is the right to carry being recognized do if you're going to be jacked up every time you strap on iron and step outside your house do?

Cops will use any and all tactics available to protect themselves.

I'm not defending them, because for the most part I think they get a little TOO nervous about it, but what's the solution?

Essentially, you have the right but are intimidated out of exercising it.

They sure aren't going to pass a law saying that cops CANNOT treat an armed person with extreme caution, and question them at will.

"I was fortunate that there was a uniformed officer to my right that I saw out of the corner of my eye"

You were oblivious to your surroundings. A bad guy would have taken your gun. Given it's NH though, they had no justification for the ambush.

I admit freely, and with a definite measure of shame, that I was in "Condition White" - a mistake on my part. I wound up getting absorbed in the book I was looking at, and wasn't paying attention to my surroundings.

Two object lessons, then: don't spook the sheep, and pay attention!

Ooooooooh.... Mike, you da man!!!!

Wait, when did you leave Kalifornia? Last I saw you was at the NRA Annual Meeting in Reno, NV.

Give 'em heck!

Weird, if open carry is fine in New Hampshire, how do they know that they are not assaulting a cop that just forgot his cover shirt?

Ack!!! You were on CONDITION WHITE!!!

You are supposed to be always in Condition Yellow. You should have seen them coming!

Your complaints would have carried more weight if they attacked face to face. You could have been a cop. Spooking the sheep is something that doesn't really matter in NH, VT, or other places that recognize and honor the right. The sheep need to learn that it is a right and that their fellow citizens are not violent criminals. Those idiots wearing the badges that refuse to recognize the right and act to intimidate those that exercise it, also need to learn that their fellow citizens are not killers from another planet that just stopped by to inflict chaos. Their actions in the store indicate that they'll badmouth the citizens elsewhere, such as to the public and legislators.

Oh we can defend ourselves.

Only with permission, outside of your house.

We are one of the few that can protect our property also.

Agreed.

If I was a cop I would rather see a weapon but my trainer was a cop and he said "cops, do not like citizens armed and do not want to see your weapon"

So this amounts to a huge sensitivity exercise for cops. They don't "like" citizens armed, and they don't "want" to see people's weapons. That's very nice of them to tell us their likes and wants, but their job is to keep the peace and enforce laws, by protecting the rights and property of citizens, who as public servants they are there to serve. I guess it just doesn't work that way anymore, though, does it?

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.