OchoBlue 3 Posted January 22, 2014 http://sbynews.blogspot.com/2014/01/jackson-gun-owner-unarmed-unwelcome-in.html Is that what would have happened if NJ DLs were emblazoned with FID info ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
djg0770 481 Posted January 22, 2014 Da! I mean Jawohl, err, Si? YES! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Newtonian 453 Posted January 22, 2014 I am suspicious of this story. I've only read about it in the ultra right-wing rags. Something is not right. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
djg0770 481 Posted January 22, 2014 I am suspicious of this story. I've only read about it in the ultra right-wing rags. Something is not right. Cause this would be reported in the mainstream left wing media why? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Newtonian 453 Posted January 22, 2014 Cause this would be reported in the mainstream left wing media why? I catch what you're trying to say. I just think it's over the top. How did they know he owned a firearm? That's the crux of this story. If facts went down as reported, we should read about many more stops like this one. I don't believe the cops yet have this capability. Maybe it was a drug sweep. Maybe the officer just took a flyer and asked the wife, who obviously caved. "I don't know, maybe in the glove box." If the officer really believed that, he might have asked her to exit the vehicle and searched the glove box. Just smells to me of anti-anti-gun propaganda. I'd love to know the truth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ogfarmer 138 Posted January 22, 2014 This quote is from a article Florida's concealed carry law states: "The Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services shall maintain an automated listing of licenseholders and pertinent information, and such information shall be available online, upon request, at all times to all law enforcement agencies through the Florida Crime Information Center." "How these factors may have interacted in this incident is unclear, but at the very least, the Tribune's report raises serious questions about how records indicating a person is a gun owner might lead to unwarranted suspicion and discrimination, even in the absence of wrongdoing." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oneshot 45 Posted January 22, 2014 Typical over reach and abuse of power. Nick feel free to mark your license that you are a gun owner with a sharpie marker. One of the dumbest ideas i have heard of having CCW on your license!. Its none of the Govt business who onws guns. Go chase the real bad guy oh wait that would be the Govt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Malsua 1,422 Posted January 22, 2014 I catch what you're trying to say. I just think it's over the top. How did they know he owned a firearm? That's the crux of this story. If facts went down as reported, we should read about many more stops like this one. I don't believe the cops yet have this capability. Maybe it was a drug sweep. Maybe the officer just took a flyer and asked the wife, who obviously caved. "I don't know, maybe in the glove box." If the officer really believed that, he might have asked her to exit the vehicle and searched the glove box. Just smells to me of anti-anti-gun propaganda. I'd love to know the truth. There was more detail explained here: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2014/01/20/update-on-the-mr-filippidis-maryland-concealed-carry-driver-incident/ Here's the meat of it Maryland State has invested heavily in Homeland Security technical capabilities, and they have structured their law enforcement community to engage in very specific activity surrounding their investment. Maryland State has a network of technical security databases which access the databases of all other states who comply and coordinate with them. For states who do not willfully comply, or those who are not set up to align technically, Maryland mines data from various LEO systems. Maryland has a rather innocuous sounding name for the intelligence hub which contains this data, it’s called Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center. The intelligence analysis hub has access to, and contains, Florida’s CCW list (among other identification systems) and mines the state’s database systems for vehicle plate numbers of the holders. These license plate numbers are then stored in a cross referencing database within the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center. The database is directly connected to another Maryland technological system. ALPR (Automatic License Plate Reader) system is a tracking system synergized with the MCAC Hub. All license plates travelling through ALPR assignments are recorded. The system is set up to allow flags to automatically notify local LEO. Every time one of the flagged license plates are detected by the ALPR an alert is generated. As a consequence Mr. Filippidis license plate was recorded at the Fort McHenry Tunnel on I-95 as he noted within the article. The Maryland Authority Police pursuit car was probably positioned a couple miles from the ALPR camera. The camera(s) are located at the tunnel itself. “More than 320 ALPRs are in use across Maryland. Information about every scanned license plate–even non-criminal–is stored at the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center.” (link) [...] These days cameras are everywhere, but some do more than watch–they automatically run criminal records. [...] Specially assigned police officers have LPRs mounted on their cars. Said Det. Brian Ralph, Baltimore Police. Ralph can scan up to 3,000 tag numbers a shift, searching for stolen vehicles and violent criminals. (link) If a flag was established within the network, and Mr. Filippidis was such a flag, once the pursuit car was alerted by the ALPR system a simple pursuit would begin. As the Tampa Tribune indicated in the article, the patrol car came abreast of Filippidi; this would allow the MTAP officer to visually confirm the driver ID from the high resolution photo from Filippidis driver’s license which was automatically on the officers on board computer screen. More at the link. This is a very scary Orwellian use of technology. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted January 22, 2014 Typical over reach and abuse of power. Nick feel free to mark your license that you are a gun owner with a sharpie marker. One of the dumbest ideas i have heard of having CCW on your license!. Its none of the Govt business who onws guns. Go chase the real bad guy oh wait that would be the Govt Re: FID notation on DL: Even more an issue than the "govt" knowing if you own guns are all the other private entities that demand driver's license as "proof of identity" knowing you own guns... Banks and other financial institutions, schools (college and graduate, etc.), Credential testing agencies, lots of things... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted January 23, 2014 Frankly what is the issue...? Privacy concerns are noted...i get that....but what is the real concern...I could care less if my bank manager knows I own guns... I'd care a whole lot if I had to go to that bank manager for a loan/mortgage, etc. and it turns out s/he was an "anti." I'm sure that such people come to battle with a dozen plausible reasons for "denial," other than the "underlying" reason. No way could you prove "discrimination" in this case. These people are "pros..." they deny people all the time. As a business owner, I have to work a lot with clients and business networking associates who are "anti." They wouldn't be my clients/associates for very long if they knew I was pro-2A. And I need all the business I can get. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EX Carnival man 223 Posted January 23, 2014 Nothing is more powerful than information. The less you give the government the better off we all will be. I've met some really nice cops and some not so nice. He maybe a wife beater, or a drunk his dept can't get rid of. Why take a chance. All I want on my license is picture license number, and address date of birth. Anything else is non of his or hers business. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted January 23, 2014 So you share your DL with your business networking group? Nothing preventing them from finding out anyway now is there? No, haven't had to share that with any of them... But I might, for example, have to show my driver's license to a potential client that requires it to gain "semi-permanent" access to their building/facility. The process for "contractors/vendors" that enter their facilities on a regular basis is often the same as FTEs... Show photo ID, be fingerprinted (sometimes - definitely on Wall St.), take a drug test, get access. And how would any of my business associates "find out" if I'm a gun owner, unless they have access to the state or local PD records or that of my dealers/FFL? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Newtonian 453 Posted January 23, 2014 There was more detail explained here: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2014/01/20/update-on-the-mr-filippidis-maryland-concealed-carry-driver-incident/ Here's the meat of it More at the link. This is a very scary Orwellian use of technology. I'm sorry, I didn't realize how serious this was. This is worse than scary. It shows a total misappropriation of law enforcement resources. Instead of going after a licensed gun owner who *might* have had his firearm in the car somewhere, maybe legally (did Maryland also know he was coming home from NJ? That would be really scary), they might focus on preventing crime in the slums of Baltimore, or one of the other shit holes in the state of Maryland. But as I've said many times, here and elsewhere, they're not really interested in the real criminals, the catch-and-release scum who feed, clothe, and house the legal/justice industry. They know they'll get them because those assholes can't help themselves. They're so stupid they practically beg to get caught. Then, after they serve 1/3 of their sentence, they'll be let go so the state can catch them again, and again, and keep the judges, cops, lawyers, and prison guards gainfully employed. Or perhaps the scumbags will kill somebody in an upscale mall and everyone involved in catching them gets to slap a "hero" sticker on their car. Over and over. The USA is fucking finished. Done. Put a fork in it now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
djg0770 481 Posted January 23, 2014 I don't believe the cops yet have this capability. An active duty dispatcher on this site, a guy well known by many people, has told me and others several times that if you have an FID, that information is available on their dispatch screen. As we say, in all things, consider the source. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Newtonian 453 Posted January 23, 2014 An active duty dispatcher on this site, a guy well known by many people, has told me and others several times that if you have an FID, that information is available on their dispatch screen. As we say, in all things, consider the source. So in other words they'd automatically know during a traffic stop? Or if they're just driving around checking plates? Wow. I haven't been stopped since July, 2007. Two months ago, coming home from the range, I stopped to move my target stand so it would stop rattling against the roof of my trunk. A local cop pulled up to ask if everything was ok. Not sure if he saw the target stand or not. No incident, no search, no other questions. Maybe we're being a bit paranoid. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,434 Posted January 23, 2014 There was more detail explained here: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2014/01/20/update-on-the-mr-filippidis-maryland-concealed-carry-driver-incident/ Here's the meat of it More at the link. This is a very scary Orwellian use of technology. So basically.. he was driving through MD. The system got his plate and cross-referenced it with the FL CCW list and generated a flag. A patrol car then investigated and eventually pulled him over. When asked about the firearm the two adults gave conflicting answers and they got to spend a few hours in the police station. If true, the wife's response, while escalating the situation, is the least of my concerns. He was flagged well before he handed over his license. This boils down to "Pulled over for owning a gun" and seems overreach and violation of 4A. He was just driving through the tunnel and didn't do anything wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bhunted 887 Posted January 23, 2014 Huh? If you think that they do not know that you own guns already, you must be deluded.... While I might be giving the gov too much credit, lol...but i do not believe that they do not know.... Also marking my license is overkill one look at my truck and you know I own guns.... Frankly what is the issue...? Privacy concerns are noted...i get that....but what is the real concern...I could care less if my bank manager knows I own guns... With me, it's not about having it on my dl or on my truck or whatever. My problem, (I've stated this before), is that the shetheads behind the DMV counter do what they want. I wouldn't let them have the power of putting you through hell by deciding to remove an FL endorsement from your DL because they had a bug up their arse. (Ask me how I know this!)..., or lose your DL or FL for whatever reason and have your multi purpose card taken. Now if this happens and they, (an leo for instance confiscates your dl and tows your vehicle), now you have no FID.... OR it's taken due to a possibly lame firearm reason, you do not drive....etc. No more MC, Boat, Truck, whatever endorsement. They'll all be affected. Part of why I'm always hesitant about putting all my eggs in the same basket.... I could care less otherwise, but I'd rather it stay seperate. One infraction should not hamper the other privileges on your card. Sent from my iPad 2 using T2 Pro Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted January 23, 2014 So basically.. he was driving through MD. The system got his plate and cross-referenced it with the FL CCW list and generated a flag. A patrol car then investigated and eventually pulled him over. When asked about the firearm the two adults gave conflicting answers and they got to spend a few hours in the police station. If true, the wife's response, while escalating the situation, is the least of my concerns. He was flagged well before he handed over his license. This boils down to "Pulled over for owning a gun" and seems overreach and violation of 4A. He was just driving through the tunnel and didn't do anything wrong. Supposedly, he was issued a ticket for 71 in a 55. I'm guessing it was the reason used to stop him. Was that ticket ever voided, or did it stick? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
njpilot 671 Posted January 23, 2014 So basically.. he was driving through MD. The system got his plate and cross-referenced it with the FL CCW list and generated a flag. A patrol car then investigated and eventually pulled him over. When asked about the firearm the two adults gave conflicting answers and they got to spend a few hours in the police station. This! If true, the wife's response, while escalating the situation, is the least of my concerns. He was flagged well before he handed over his license. This boils down to "Pulled over for owning a gun" and seems overreach and violation of 4A. He was just driving through the tunnel and didn't do anything wrong. Supposedly, he was issued a ticket for 71 in a 55. I'm guessing it was the reason used to stop him. Was that ticket ever voided, or did it stick? The article says he was flagged going through the tunnel and the pursuit vehicle was alerted. Sounds like they were looking for him. What's the RAS for pursuing him in the first place? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,434 Posted January 23, 2014 The article says he was flagged going through the tunnel and the pursuit vehicle was alerted. Sounds like they were looking for him. What's the RAS for pursuing him in the first place? I don't think they were looking for him specifically. The snippet that Malsua quoted mentioned that he was flagged because his LP was in the database because the owner of the vehicle also had a FL CCW. It's not like he had open warrants or something like that, which I think would probably justify sending a patrol to investigate. In this case, if the articles are right, he hadn't done anything wrong, wasn't wanted for any reason, and was only flagged because he had a CCW. It's like pulling someone over and asking where their bomb-vest is because they're on the No Fly List. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Respect2A 0 Posted January 23, 2014 He was stopped because he potentially had a gun with him. Potentially! Guilty until proven innocent? This is all utter horseshit. Maryland is pulling data from everywhere it seems. More horseshit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted January 23, 2014 The article says he was flagged going through the tunnel and the pursuit vehicle was alerted. Sounds like they were looking for him. Fair enough. The Tribune article states: Ninety minutes later, or maybe it was two hours — “It felt like forever,” Kally says — no weapon found and their possessions repacked, the episode ended ... with the officer writing out a warning for speeding 71 mph in a 55 mph zone. So, just a warning. Yeah, this is not good. I can bypass Washington DC by going around the Beltway, but I still have to go through MD to get to Va and further south. We need more info. about what triggers an "alert," but I doubt the MTAP will be helpful there, and I'm not sure that FOIA requests will do the trick. I'd also like to know more about what states share info. with MD. And can those practices be challenged by state "privacy" laws. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
njpilot 671 Posted January 23, 2014 I don't think they were looking for him specifically. The snippet that Malsua quoted mentioned that he was flagged because his LP was in the database because the owner of the vehicle also had a FL CCW. It's not like he had open warrants or something like that, which I think would probably justify sending a patrol to investigate. In this case, if the articles are right, he hadn't done anything wrong, wasn't wanted for any reason, and was only flagged because he had a CCW. It's like pulling someone over and asking where their bomb-vest is because they're on the No Fly List.Yeah, I didn't mean they had a look-out for him, but that after the alert from reading his plate, then they were looking for him. For no other reason then their computer system alerting him being a gun owner from a plate reader. Time to get rid of these plate readers for starters. Then we can just post soldiers on every corner to "check our papers". (Sarcasm off) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OchoBlue 3 Posted January 23, 2014 Isn't this profiling ? Could all of us Utah and Florida CCW permit holders descend upon MD at once with empty trunks and overwhelm "the system". ... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Respect2A 0 Posted January 24, 2014 Isn't this profiling ? Could all of us Utah and Florida CCW permit holders descend upon MD at once with empty trunks and overwhelm "the system". ... We can't even get everyone to Trenton. Think we going to get them to Maryland? Yeah ok Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted January 24, 2014 We can't even get everyone to Trenton. Think we going to get them to Maryland? Yeah ok Do we know that NJ owners (i.e. with NJ FID only) are also "targets" of this effort, or is it primarily people with CCW (FL, UT, or whichever), or what? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shawnmoore81 623 Posted January 24, 2014 Yeah, I didn't mean they had a look-out for him, but that after the alert from reading his plate, then they were looking for him. For no other reason then their computer system alerting him being a gun owner from a plate reader. Time to get rid of these plate readers for starters. Then we can just post soldiers on every corner to "check our papers". (Sarcasm off) I've said it for years that plate readers, red light cams and facial recognition crap has to go. If you do something wrong a cop doing police work should catch you. Not a machine. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Respect2A 0 Posted January 24, 2014 Do we know that NJ owners (i.e. with NJ FID only) are also "targets" of this effort, or is it primarily people with CCW (FL, UT, or whichever), or what? Does it matter? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted January 24, 2014 Does it matter? Philosophically? No. I believe it violates our rights on several levels. That said, it's happening to us, nonetheless, and we have to deal with it. I'd just like to know exactly with what we're dealing (i.e who they're targeting, specifically). If it's just FL CCW holders, that's one battle. If it's all CCW holders, that's a different battle. If it's all gun owners everywhere, that's a much different battle. The more we know how it works, the better we can fight it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,434 Posted January 24, 2014 Philosophically? No. I believe it violates our rights on several levels. That said, it's happening to us, nonetheless, and we have to deal with it. I'd just like to know exactly with what we're dealing (i.e who they're targeting, specifically). If it's just FL CCW holders, that's one battle. If it's all CCW holders, that's a different battle. If it's all gun owners everywhere, that's a much different battle. The more we know how it works, the better we can fight it. Unfortunately since this is an automated system, the difference is the matter of a SQL Query (I oversimplify, yes). The system can scale up and add data sets relatively easily.. its the definition of slippery slope. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites