AFCop wrote:Wow! I never thought one comment on my interpretation would have such a breath of life into this discussion.....
And why not? your a law enforcement officer that has described the implementation of a law in a way most are not in agreement with..
AFCop wrote:
Wow, the reason an AG opinion was requested was based on one guys views he expressed on an internet forum......
No see Im a guy on the internet, your a reported LEO, who is charging my fellow service members with a crime I do not believe they have committed in my view of the law.. More so, I get, my view holds no weight.. It's well established an officer's opinion on the law is all it takes for the arrest, factual, correct, and the rest is often left to the DA or a Judge.. of course by then the arrest and ride has been forced upon the citizen.. That bell can not be un-rung. While no convection may take place the arrest will forever more bee public record.
AFCop wrote:
Did I at least put up a good argument? What about the "testimony"..... This is something I have put a little thought and care into..... Can I at least get that much?
Professional, considerate,polite for sure
Never the less I disagree with your reasoning, logic you present as justification, and by your statements, you have used, that in my opinion false reasoning and justification to charge, and apparently get a convection on a fellow service member, who in my opinion did not do anything wrong (for that charge, the DUI thing,.. Im fine with appropriate punishment upon convection.)
I find no malice in your position, attitude and argument
Yet I think your wrong, and will continue until an AG opinion has been rendered, or im told there will not be one. I would do the same thing if a LEO here stated his opinion was, all persons in a car that contains a gun, inside a school zone will be arrested as they have access to the gun, and do not have a CHL, no matter the person with the gun in his possession does..
Or all guns found at the scene of a car accident, will be confiscated, for ballistics testing and SER # checks in case it was stolen or used in a crime. or...anything thing else I believe is an abortion of the actual law as written.
LEO's have a tough job, and I can imagine it is very difficult to do well, professionally. I do though have a huge problem when a LEO brings in his personal opinion and enforces a law that does not exists, or in a way it was not intended. A citizen is told, ignorance of the law is no excuse, yet the same standard is not applied to LEO's, DA's, Judges. Some internal censure or reprimand may take place, but what should happen is they should be arrested, and presented before a judge, with them to paying for a lawyer from personal funds. If they are acquitted, or found not guilty, then so be it. Just like a citizen who is arrested, detained, tried, and then a case is dismissed by a judge or the DA refuses to bring it at all, due to an officers misapplication or ignorance of the law.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse... and both the enforcer and the enforce e should be held to the same standard.