But they weren't standing around on private property, they were in a public dining establishment which police had been summoned to in response to a citizen account of someone brandishing firearms. A quick check of ID, establishing that no crime has been committed, and everyone's on their way. I agree with being secure in one's papers, but I see nothing unreasonable given a) the call, b) likely PA's laws regarding possession of firearms by fellons in providing identification, and I bet the court will agree on this point.
/johnny
/johnny
I wonder if the police at the scene made any attempt to establish who made the actual complaint? After all, you need a witness, right? A voice on the phone to a 911 operator that somebody “brandished” a weapon would not seem to be sufficient evidence if when I walk in the door I observe everybody peacefully eating.
Given the training-level of some 911 operators, I’d take any report passed thru them with a huge grain of salt.
That said, I’d have produced the ID if the officer had asked for it — just out of courtesy. But it all depends on how the officer behaved. I mean I might not have if I was abruptly being ordered around.
How does an ID check establish that no crime had been committed? I’m very unclear about that.
If the police saw someone truly brandishing (waving around) a firearm, or if someone filed a non-anonymous complaint about same, then fine, arrest the guy. But playing “Vere are your PAPERS!?” games with people exercising an enumerated right based on someone freaking out over a holstered pistol shouldn’t be acceptable.