NFRs2000NYC

What was the order for? What happened?

I believe it is still free if you have it pegged to a credit card. I just checked my statement and don't see any kind of fees on it.

You have great evidence BUT, I wouldn't be surprised if these idiots don't say "you should have pulled over, gone over to the offices, and handled it that way." Either way, I hope you beat it.

Honestly, I have been in the bar/restaurant/club industry for over 15 years, and in NYC, I have never seen Police at the door carding. I have seen PLENTY of raids, but never what you describe. However, I do believe you it happens down at the shore, I just have personally haven't seen it. Are these officers specifically assigned to stay at a place all night and card, or are they just patrol cops? It seems strange to be that they are taking the responsibility of carding, since IF somehow, someway, an underage person makes it through (fake id or whatever), and something happens to them, the police is on the hook, since they were the ones checking IDs...just wondering...

Maybe we could argue that had California allowed open carry, and the perp saw a gun on the guy's belt, he may have reconsidered. I guess the one thing we can take from this is "you never know." It can come anytime, anywhere.

That, plus the occupy wall street crowd is keeping the departments nice and busy. The problem with this case is that it seems now the officer apparently had no "right" to detain here. Trespassing is defined by... Sec. 140.05 Trespass A person is guilty of trespass when he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in or upon premises. Here is the problem...they stated... Now, they were not refusing to leave, which is why the judge saw right through it and dismissed the ticket in less than a minute. Unlike private property trespassing, where the owner tells you to leave, and if you fail, police show up, they can arrest you right there, since it was a park without official locking gates, ignorance of signage CAN play a role, which again, is why the judge dismissed the ticket so fast. I think there is going to be a lawsuit filed against the NYPD on this one.

The article seems poorly worded, but it seems she was trespassing somewhere, in which case, the officer does have the right to ask for ID. Though the judge may think the ticket it frivolous (I have received a trespassing ticket in front of a deli in my younger days, in which the judge immediately threw it out) but the ID request seems to have been legit.

Oh, and since we are actually looking for information here are some things I found interesting... http://www.akemplaw.com/wiki/2007/10/31/guns-at-work/ http://www.lexisnexis.com/community/workerscompensationlaw/blogs/workerscompensationlawblog/archive/2010/02/17/larson_2700_s-blogworthy-cases-of-the-week-8_2f00_22_2f00_2008.aspx There is some meat in this case. While there are no OSHA rules banning guns outright, the law can be interpreted that way by OSHA...they kind of left the door open for themselves. Just thought you guys might be interested in this.

I never argued, so if you would like me to admit it, ok. Just so you know, guns are ALL ILLEGAL IN NJ FOR EVERYONE...however, there are exceptions, such as police, FID holders, etc etc etc. Just because it is illegal for all businesses to have guns in the workplace, does not mean there are no exceptions. In this case, as I said above, I wasn't sure, and it was just a post. If you just want to make a spectacle of it, so be it. I was wrong.

That is your right. However, I did read the OSHA laws on working conditions, and they are very broad. Walgreens did not want bad light shed on the company (although they failed miserably) so they blamed it on "corporate policy." However, Walgreens does not actually have a "no firearms" policy, they have a "non-escalation policy." There is a Walgreens a few blocks from my house, and the last time the wife was getting her prescription filled, I was BSing with the manager about this. Their policy to their employers are generally a non escalation policy (like all major retail outlets) and comply with local laws and regulations. The rumor started that they actually did ALL this to make sure OSHA keeps off their backs. Is it possible? Sure. Is it 100%? No it isn't. As for the website in my sig, hey, I'm not holding a gun to your head, and I am sorry you have no interest in it. It is a free service brought to members, and they have nothing to lose. We have helped many people with a number of issues, including custody, divorce, real estate, etc...questions that an attorney would normally charge you for "consultation." If you take my PERSONAL views on this, and mix them with business, that's one thing. It seems you may be someone who does not like brash statements, but that's ok. Regardless, my brother-in-law answers the legal questions (he actually IS one of the attorneys) so if you every need anything, by all means. All the best.

http://biggovernment.com/jlott/2011/05/25/hero-gets-fired-for-using-a-gun-to-stop-robbery/ I got my info from news stories. I have honestly not been able to find the actual OSHA regulation. It seems the law was being "decided" but never passed. What was though, is some messy regulations which many don't understand, so in order to watch their backs, companies assume the worst case scenario in order to comply with OSHA regulations, to avoid OSHA fines.

Awesome isn't it? If you take a look at the walgreens incident, common sense tells you that it is worth getting fired in exchange for your life.

Correct. If you lease the property, it's "yours" for the duration of said lease.

It is only a crime if you refuse to leave. It becomes trespassing, or even worse, can be charged with criminal trespassing.

This is true for any state. The 2nd amendment does not include private property. Any private landowner/business owner may ask you to leave if they do not want firearms on premises.

Since it's private property, they can determine their own rules. Call up the park and ask if they have a no firearm policy.

After looking at the other cameras (I own a GoPro), there seems to be ONE very important aspect that some are overlooking...durability. I use my gopro to film my track runs. I have had the camera fall off twice. Both times, although the outer case was damaged ($20 replacement) the camera is unscathed. There is a reason why they don't have LCD screens...they are easy to break. I like the other options as well, but it honestly depends what you need it for. For me, the gopro has proven, time and time again, to be the most durable and easiest way to film "extreme" stuff and not have to worry about losing your data. The Gopro is waterproof as well, provided you use the solid door.

I never said they can't. I clearly wrote that RAIDS are allowed. I was talking about the DOOR of the club. No crimes (ie underage drinking) have occurred at the door. This isn't Minority Report. We don't have pre-crime. It is also not that simple. What about clubs that are 18+, but 21 to drink, do police ID everyone? No, they ID people who have a drink in their hand. A drink in their hand is enough. I think you are talking about oranges as opposed to my apples.

Really? Did you not bother to read the rest of the thread??? Police can't just stand on the sidewalk checking IDs. Who said I was going in that club, maybe I am walking by. Police have no right to randomly check IDs EVER. Instead of being sarcastic and condescending, consider reading the rest of the thread. Club doors, even if outside, is still private domain. Police also have ZERO right to harass patrons of any business unless, again, they have REASON TO DO SO. Police also have ZERO right to participate or interfere with private business unless again, there is criminal activity going on, or at a MINIMUM, suspicion. Fake IDS are a crime/misdemeanor for the person, not the business, thus, the business is still protected from police involvement of ANY kind. BTW, just out of curiosity, I will do research in regards to the police officers dressing in club staff uniforms and trying to catch fake IDs. I don't think that is allowed, but will find out for sure.

And on that note, I hope you guys really try and understand what you actually saw in that video. In states with no concealed carry, where your political leaders expect you to rely on police for protection, it's nice to know that if you are getting stabbed, police will tug on the perps belt for you. I hope you lot do your due diligence to protect your families, regardless of police protection. Have a great week.

Agreed (although in this case, the man on the bottom didn't seem to pose a threat.)

On a side note, a few members took my "worthless" comments about police personally....I am not anti police. My local township cops (Millburn/Short Hills) are very nice, professional guys. I like police when they act with TRUE CPR (courtesy, professionalism, respect.) However, in corrupt organizations like NYPD, LAPD, etc, they have gotten out of control and need to be stopped. Here is the newest example. http://m.nypost.com/p/news/local/nypd_cops_among_arrested_in_gun_SqJMEbnKJcPdF8itqxN9EJ

Fair enough. But again, you are talking about TWO different things. Fundamentally, we are in agreement. I agree with everything you said PERSONALLY. However, there is a reason things like I posted happen. Police have a certain way of doing business. When police even CONFRONT anyone with a weapon, they have their guns drawn. If that person is told to put the knife down, and instead, goes for someone's throat, they are going to get shot, period. If police burst into your home (in the exact scenario you described) they will tell you to drop the knife. If you do NOT, they WILL open fire on you, regardless of you being the owner, and regardless that your wife was just stabbed by this guy. They have seconds to make a decision, and in there eyes, they have man A doing grave bodily harm to man B. At this point, previous circumstances cease to be taken into account, as police can only judge what they see in front of them. Sure, if on the phone call to police, you were described as a blond male, and the perp is a black male, police MIGHT have an easier time telling who is who, but that is not always the case. You are also putting words in my mouth. I never said police should hop out of their cars, and open fire. However, when police are clearly surrounding you, yelling for you to stop, and you DON'T, AND you are causing bodily harm, your one and only warning passed.

Shooting and killing are two very different things in the eyes of the law. In the eyes of the law, death is a side effect of shooting. A shot between the eyes would be considered KILLING. Police are trained to stop a threat. This is the same training you guys go through in home defense gun classes. You are NOT trained to kill. You are trained to shoot center mass, and stop the threat. Did you know that after a home defense shooting, you are supposed to call an ambulance and attempt to provide first aid if possible? Now sure, 99 times out of 100 nobody will care if you didn't administer first aid, but if you actively kill someone, believe me, it won't end up well for you. Just ask the pharmacist who shot that kid, and sentenced to life in prison. The first shots were "clean" but the last were "kill shots" and sent him to prison. There is a big difference between SHOOTING and KILLING. http://abcnews.go.com/US/oklahoma-pharmacist-dead-robbers-accomplices-life-prison/story?id=14053802 On a side note to address your other point....and BTW, it has happened before, if you called 911, and when police get there, you are in your OWN HOUSE actively stabbing the intruder, do NOT be surprised if you get shot in the process. This is why when police arrive at your house, you drop your weapons, raise your hands, and yell that you are the caller. You do NOT continue to engage when police arrive, or else, your point rings true. Police do not know who is who, and will take out the person they THINK is the threat. Remember, they are human. If you walk in on a stabbing, what are you going to think? Time won't help you decide who is who. http://abcnews.go.com/US/phoenix-family-lawsuit-cops-shot-homeowner-intruder/story?id=8756441

I don't answer legal questions on the site. The legal questions on that site that people ask are rarely something that I would know. It is mostly contracts, divorce, real estate, etc. I don't know why you lot are offended. I am not trying to sell a point. I am posting straight facts. It is your OPINION that police should not have shot the perp. However, given the circumstances, it was either SHOOT the perp, or risk having the man on the bottom killed by the perp. If you have information that leads to an otherwise different point of view, I would love to hear it, but like I said, opinions and protocols are two different things. Remember Sean Bell? He was shot, alone in his car, not stabbing anyone.