May 17, 2011 Philly Police Harass, Threaten to Shoot Man Legally Carrying Gun (Warning: Explicit Language Used) Fire it up
24 183 Share YouTube Screengrab
WARNING: Explicit, offensive language used
Philly Police Harass, Threaten to Shoot Man Legally Carrying Gun By John Stossel Created 05/16/2011 - 18:49
A story in today's Philadelphia Daily News shows why it's so important that citizens be allowed to videotape cops - it can be citizens' only way to fight back against police abuse of power.
This incident happened several weeks ago in Philadelphia to Mark Fiorino, a 25-year-old IT worker who carries a gun on his hip at all times for self defense. He got the gun after several friends were mugged.
But he didn't count on attacks by police:
On a mild February afternoon, Fiorino, 25, decided to walk to an AutoZone on Frankford Avenue in Northeast Philly with the .40-caliber Glock he legally owns holstered in plain view on his left hip. His stroll ended when someone called out from behind: "Yo, Junior, what are you doing?"
Fiorino wheeled and saw Sgt. Michael Dougherty aiming a handgun at him.
What happened next would be hard to believe, except that Fiorino audio-recorded all of it: a tense, profanity-laced, 40-minute encounter with cops who told him that what he was doing - openly carrying a gun on the city's streets - was against the law.
"Do you know you can't openly carry here in Philadelphia?" Dougherty asked, according to the YouTube clip.
Wonder if the cops would have shot him, if they would have been charged with murder? If he shot the cops, since they were threatening his life, would he have been charged with murder?
IP: Logged
03:27 PM
87antuzzi Member
Posts: 11151 From: Surrounded by corn. Registered: Feb 2009
It never ceases to amaze me that those whose job it is to uphold the law do not, in fact, know the laws they are supposed to enforce!
Here's what I found when I Googled "Directive 137 Philadelphia":
GENERAL: 1272 09/22/10 12:53:20
TO : ALL COMMANDING OFFICERS / DEPARTMENT HEADS SUBJECT : FIREARM OPEN CARRY LAW IN PHILADELPHIA
1. DIRECTIVE 137, ENTITLED “FIREARMS” IS BEING UPDATED CONCERNING THE PENNSYLVANIA OPEN CARRY LAWS REGARDING THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA. THIS TELETYPE REFLECTS THE NEW POLICY AS IT WILL APPEAR IN THE DIRECTIVE.
2. ALL OFFICERS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT PENNSYLVANIA IS CONSIDERED AN “OPEN CARRY STATE” WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PHILADELPHIA. IT IS IMPORTANT TO DEFINE A FEW TERMS USED, WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS:
“OPEN CARRY” REFERS TO THE ACT OF OPENLY AND VISIBLY CARRYING A FIREARM ON ONE’S PERSON.
“OPEN CARRY STATE” REFERS TO A STATE THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO OPENLY AND VISIBLY CARRY A FIREARM ON ONE’S PERSON WITHOUT A SPECIAL LICENSE OR PERMIT.
“CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE” REFERS TO A SPECIFIC LICENSE ISSUED TO AN INDIVIDUAL AUTHORIZING THE PERSON TO CARRY A FIREARM CONCEALED ON HIS OR HER PERSON OR VEHICLE.
3. IN PHILADELPHIA, UNLIKE ANY OTHER PART OF THE STATE, FOR ANY PERSON TO LAWFULLY, OPENLY AND VISIBLY CARRY A FIREARM, THAT PERSON MUST HAVE A CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE. SO, IN PHILADELPHIA, IF A PERSON HAS A VALID CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE, HE OR SHE CAN LEGALLY CARRY A FIREARM EITHER OPEN AND VISIBLE OR CONCEALED.
4. AN OFFICER ENCOUNTERING A PERSON CARRYING A FIREARM OPENLY IN PHILADELPHIA SHOULD FOR THE SAFTEY OF PUBLIC INVESTIGATE AS A POSSIBLE VUFA VIOLATION.
A. SINCE A SEPARATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN PHILADELPHIA AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY OFFICER TO KNOW WHO DOES AND DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE, IT IS ENTIRELY REASONALBE FOR OFFICERS TO TEMPORARILY DETAIN AND INVESTIGATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CARRYING A FIREARM EXPOSED TO DETERMINE IF THE PERSON IS OPERATING WITH THE LAW.
B. IMMEDIATLEY SEIZE ANY FIREARMS FOR OFFICER SAFETY DURING THE STOP AND UNLOAD THE FIREARMS IF POSSIBLE, BUT ONLY IF IT CAN BE DONE SAFELY.
C. A 75-48A MUST BE COMPLETED AND THE BASIS FOR THE STOP WOULD BE A “POSSIBLE VUFA VIOLATION”
D. ONCE THE OFFICER RECEIVES CONFIRMATION THAT THE CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE IS VALID, AND THERE ARE NO OTHER OFFENSE OR VIOLATIONS BEING INVESTIGATED, OFFICERS SHOULD RETURN THE FIREARM AND AMMUNITION BACK TO THE INDIVIDUAL AT THE END OF THE STOP.
E. HOWEVER, IF THE INDIVIDUAL CANNOT PRODUCE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE OR THE LICENSE IS NOT VALID (I.E. EXPIRED OR REVOKED), PROBABLE CAUSE THEN EXISTS TO ARREST THE INDIVIDUAL FOR THE VUFAVIOLATION AND TRANSPORT THE INDIVIDUAL TO THE DIVISIONAL DETECTIVES FOR PROCESSING. THE FIREARM AND AMMUNITION SHOULD BE PLACED ON A PROPERTY RECEIPT (75-3) AND MARKED AS “ EVIDENCE”. A 75-48A FOR THE INITIAL STOP MUST BE PREPARD ALONG WITH A 75-48 FOR THE VUFA ARREST.
ALL COMMANDING OFFICERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS WILL ENSURE THAT ALL PERSONNEL UNDER THEIR COMMAND ARE MADE AWARE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS MESSAGE BY HAVING THE OFFICER SIGN THEIR TRAINING MATERIAL RECEIPT/RECORD. (75-578)
TO BE READ AT ROLL CALL FOR THREE CONSECUTIVE DAYS.
IP: Logged
04:09 PM
nitroheadz28 Member
Posts: 4774 From: Brooklyn, NY Registered: Mar 2010
Originally posted by mrfiero: It never ceases to amaze me that those whose job it is to uphold the law do not, in fact, know the laws they are supposed to enforce!
Here's what I found when I Googled "Directive 137 Philadelphia":
GENERAL: 1272 09/22/10 12:53:20
TO : ALL COMMANDING OFFICERS / DEPARTMENT HEADS SUBJECT : FIREARM OPEN CARRY LAW IN PHILADELPHIA
1. DIRECTIVE 137, ENTITLED “FIREARMS” IS BEING UPDATED CONCERNING THE PENNSYLVANIA OPEN CARRY LAWS REGARDING THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA. THIS TELETYPE REFLECTS THE NEW POLICY AS IT WILL APPEAR IN THE DIRECTIVE.
2. ALL OFFICERS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT PENNSYLVANIA IS CONSIDERED AN “OPEN CARRY STATE” WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PHILADELPHIA. IT IS IMPORTANT TO DEFINE A FEW TERMS USED, WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS:
“OPEN CARRY” REFERS TO THE ACT OF OPENLY AND VISIBLY CARRYING A FIREARM ON ONE’S PERSON.
“OPEN CARRY STATE” REFERS TO A STATE THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO OPENLY AND VISIBLY CARRY A FIREARM ON ONE’S PERSON WITHOUT A SPECIAL LICENSE OR PERMIT.
“CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE” REFERS TO A SPECIFIC LICENSE ISSUED TO AN INDIVIDUAL AUTHORIZING THE PERSON TO CARRY A FIREARM CONCEALED ON HIS OR HER PERSON OR VEHICLE.
3. IN PHILADELPHIA, UNLIKE ANY OTHER PART OF THE STATE, FOR ANY PERSON TO LAWFULLY, OPENLY AND VISIBLY CARRY A FIREARM, THAT PERSON MUST HAVE A CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE. SO, IN PHILADELPHIA, IF A PERSON HAS A VALID CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE, HE OR SHE CAN LEGALLY CARRY A FIREARM EITHER OPEN AND VISIBLE OR CONCEALED.
4. AN OFFICER ENCOUNTERING A PERSON CARRYING A FIREARM OPENLY IN PHILADELPHIA SHOULD FOR THE SAFTEY OF PUBLIC INVESTIGATE AS A POSSIBLE VUFA VIOLATION.
A. SINCE A SEPARATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN PHILADELPHIA AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY OFFICER TO KNOW WHO DOES AND DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE, IT IS ENTIRELY REASONALBE FOR OFFICERS TO TEMPORARILY DETAIN AND INVESTIGATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CARRYING A FIREARM EXPOSED TO DETERMINE IF THE PERSON IS OPERATING WITH THE LAW.
B. IMMEDIATLEY SEIZE ANY FIREARMS FOR OFFICER SAFETY DURING THE STOP AND UNLOAD THE FIREARMS IF POSSIBLE, BUT ONLY IF IT CAN BE DONE SAFELY.
C. A 75-48A MUST BE COMPLETED AND THE BASIS FOR THE STOP WOULD BE A “POSSIBLE VUFA VIOLATION”
D. ONCE THE OFFICER RECEIVES CONFIRMATION THAT THE CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE IS VALID, AND THERE ARE NO OTHER OFFENSE OR VIOLATIONS BEING INVESTIGATED, OFFICERS SHOULD RETURN THE FIREARM AND AMMUNITION BACK TO THE INDIVIDUAL AT THE END OF THE STOP.
E. HOWEVER, IF THE INDIVIDUAL CANNOT PRODUCE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE OR THE LICENSE IS NOT VALID (I.E. EXPIRED OR REVOKED), PROBABLE CAUSE THEN EXISTS TO ARREST THE INDIVIDUAL FOR THE VUFAVIOLATION AND TRANSPORT THE INDIVIDUAL TO THE DIVISIONAL DETECTIVES FOR PROCESSING. THE FIREARM AND AMMUNITION SHOULD BE PLACED ON A PROPERTY RECEIPT (75-3) AND MARKED AS “ EVIDENCE”. A 75-48A FOR THE INITIAL STOP MUST BE PREPARD ALONG WITH A 75-48 FOR THE VUFA ARREST.
ALL COMMANDING OFFICERS/DEPARTMENT HEADS WILL ENSURE THAT ALL PERSONNEL UNDER THEIR COMMAND ARE MADE AWARE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS MESSAGE BY HAVING THE OFFICER SIGN THEIR TRAINING MATERIAL RECEIPT/RECORD. (75-578)
TO BE READ AT ROLL CALL FOR THREE CONSECUTIVE DAYS.
well, looks like 4a explains it all
you are guilty, until proven innocent......
IP: Logged
04:24 PM
Rallaster Member
Posts: 9105 From: Indy southside, IN Registered: Jul 2009
Yep read about this and listened to the audio in the morning today... Despicable. And hes being charged with something, I forgot with what already.
quote
The Police Department heard about the YouTube clips. A new investigation was launched, and last month the District Attorney's Office decided to charge Fiorino with reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct because, a spokeswoman said, he refused to cooperate with police.
Originally posted by mrfiero:GENERAL: 1272 09/22/10 12:53:20
TO : ALL COMMANDING OFFICERS / DEPARTMENT HEADS SUBJECT : FIREARM OPEN CARRY LAW IN PHILADELPHIA ... 2. ALL OFFICERS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT PENNSYLVANIA IS CONSIDERED AN “OPEN CARRY STATE” WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PHILADELPHIA. IT IS IMPORTANT TO DEFINE A FEW TERMS USED, WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS: ...
IP: Logged
04:56 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
Read a little further.. "3. IN PHILADELPHIA, UNLIKE ANY OTHER PART OF THE STATE, FOR ANY PERSON TO LAWFULLY, OPENLY AND VISIBLY CARRY A FIREARM, THAT PERSON MUST HAVE A CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE. SO, IN PHILADELPHIA, IF A PERSON HAS A VALID CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE, HE OR SHE CAN LEGALLY CARRY A FIREARM EITHER OPEN AND VISIBLE OR CONCEALED." He did have a CCW. The police officers were the criminals this time.
IP: Logged
04:58 PM
PFF
System Bot
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Wonder if the cops would have shot him, if they would have been charged with murder?
No.
quote
Originally posted by dennis_6:
If he shot the cops, since they were threatening his life, would he have been charged with murder?
Yes.
You can pretty much guarantee any LEO will not be charged for murder for anything that happens on duty. It would take an extreme situation for it to happen. You can also guarantee any citizen who shoots a LEO FOR ANY REASON will be charged with murder or attempted murder of a LEO. An illegal immigrant would probably just be deported.
IP: Logged
05:00 PM
Doug85GT Member
Posts: 9469 From: Sacramento CA USA Registered: May 2003
One aspect of law enforcement that bothers me is the lack of treating the public with respect and dignity. It is rare that I leave any encounter with the police with the feeling that I was treated fairly and with respect. Even when they came to my door and asked me if I saw anything after the neighbors had a domestic violence dispute, the cops attitude was horrible. I wasn't even involved and the guy was being a jackass.
I should have just ended the conversation and told him to get off my lawn as soon as he started getting an attitude. Instead I gave my account of what little I saw and heard. If me, just a minor witness was treated like an ******* , I wonder how they were treating the victim and the perp.
I will be less inclinded to give any statement next time.
IP: Logged
05:01 PM
Boondawg Member
Posts: 38235 From: Displaced Alaskan Registered: Jun 2003
What a load of crap they pulled. Just one more reason I won't go to NE Philly. As bad as the area is, I don't like going there in the first place. I've been to that Autozone he was in...Its a horrible neighborhood. Only reason I'll go there though is if the 2 in Bristol/Fairless Hills doesn't have the parts I need.
And Doug, I have to agree. My most recent encounter with an LEO, the guy gave me a huge attitude at the end, only for the fact that I was in the right and he wasn't able to arrest me and impound my car. And that was in Reading. I had just bought the car less than a week prior, and he pulled me over for expired inspection stickers, which PA law states I have 10 days to get the vehicle inspected after purchase.
IP: Logged
05:20 PM
OKflyboy Member
Posts: 6607 From: Not too far from Mexico Registered: Nov 2004
What a load of crap they pulled. Just one more reason I won't go to NE Philly. As bad as the area is, I don't like going there in the first place. I've been to that Autozone he was in...Its a horrible neighborhood. Only reason I'll go there though is if the 2 in Bristol/Fairless Hills doesn't have the parts I need.
It's sad when the police are as responsible for making an area uninhabitable as the thugs and crooks are.
Wonder if the cops would have shot him, if they would have been charged with murder? If he shot the cops, since they were threatening his life, would he have been charged with murder?
if they announced they were police, he would be charged. if they did not, it might not go that direction.
I have always been treated fairly, with the exception of one time. And that time, I started out with an attitude.
I have also been treated fairly in any encounter i had. Even the time i was wrongly jailed. ( the arresting sheriff didn't know what was going on at the time, but during the transaction i was treated fairly and with respect, even spoke to the judge when it came time for the charges to be dismissed. )
odd, i thought Texas was an unlicensed open carry state.
That surprised me too. This incident really disturbs me. At first I could not find out if he had his CCW, because that would make a difference in him obeying the law or breaking it. (dennis finally posted the answer), but even if he did not have his CCW, the police really handled this poorly. I actually prefer to open carry, but I do not because of fear of something like this happening. VA is rated a plus State for open carry, and my encounters with police in my duties as a manager have always been positive in this respect though. I'm sure there is one a** cop out there, and it only takes one.
Jim
[This message has been edited by jimbolaya (edited 05-17-2011).]
That surprised me too. This incident really disturbs me. At first I could not find out if he had his CCW, because that would make a difference in him obeying the law or breaking it. (dennis finally posted the answer), but even if he did not have his CCW, the police really handled this poorly. I actually prefer to open carry, but I do not because of fear of something like this happening. VA is rated an plus States for open carry, and my encounters with police in my duties as a manager have always been positive in this respect though. I'm sure there is one ass cop out there, and it only takes one.
Jim
I also don't open carry even tho i can here. Its not worth the risk or hassle. And to give the police credit, its not common here and the don't know me from boo...
... Even when they came to my door and asked me if I saw anything after the neighbors had a domestic violence dispute, the cops attitude was horrible. I wasn't even involved and the guy was being a jackass.
I should have just ended the conversation and told him to get off my lawn as soon as he started getting an attitude. Instead I gave my account of what little I saw and heard. If me, just a minor witness was treated like an ******* , I wonder how they were treating the victim and the perp.
I will be less inclinded to give any statement next time.
You are a better man than me.
The last time I was arrested. I was the one that called the police. The first officer on scene was a female, and was nice/polite. The second officer was a male, "knew my type". talked to me like I was a wife beater, and had me in handcuffs before he even called to check my ID. He pressed me against my car, and asked me several times where I had the pot at. I was arrested on a "warrant" that had been taken care of for over a year.
I had called to report my sister-in-law racing around town, 9 month old daughter in the car, no car seat etc.
The last thing the cop told me was "We don't need you to tell us what goes on in this town."
I will never help another cop out as long as I live. And I will not lose any sleep over it. Drunk drivers, the guy last week that had beat the crap out of his wife, and was hiding on the neighbors porch while they searched for him. I don't care. I've been told not to help, and the point was driven home as I was handcuffed and hauled to the local jail.
Hate me for it if you want, if you can't understand my reasons then you have been lucky, and not mistreated by these people that hide behind a badge.
Dosent surprise me Philadelphia are some of the most corrupt and Biggest R-tards you could ever call police officers.. for one they skew just about any law so it will work in there favor and 2 they wouldent know how to wipe there own a$4 unless someone showed them how.
IP: Logged
07:04 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Those cops do not need to be on the police force.....
I know the cops were wrong, but after the first two minutes of the audio, the citizen could have helped defuse the situation. He was in the right, but if a LEO tells you to do something and you don't, regardless of whether you're in the right, it's going to escalate the situation.
Those cops do not need to be on the police force.....
Sounds just like the philadelphia retard,,ahem police department... There a bunch of idiots.. just the other night i was listning to a police scaner about a shooting at temple university only to hear 5 min later it wasent a shooting at all but a student who tripped going down the steps and was being taken to the ER
Couldn't listen to the whole audio. But in the first TEN SECONDS I could tell this was going to go downhill at an alarming rate. You're walking around armed in North Philly? And you're surprised when a cop stops you with his gun drawn?
So, what is the best way to defuse this situation?
That's right, argue with the cop. that'll calm him down. After all he probably hasn't been shot at. Today.
Yes, the cop IS a retard. But when a retard cop meets a jackwad gun owner, things don't end well. I'm surprised nobody got shot. the middle of the street is NOT the place to defend your rights.
I hate when cops tell you to get to the ground. I really feel like they just want you to grovel to them.
I'm sorry, but if I am not breaking any laws, no officer should have the right to tell me to "GET ON THE F*&^ING GROUND NOW OR I'LL F^&*ING SHOOT YOU!"
That's fine then, shoot to wound me (hopefully), but there's no reason for me to grovel at your feet because you're on a power trip. We're both human beings that should have the capability to have a rational discussion.
Zeb did you really think that gun owner was that bad? Really the only thing he didn't comply with was the demand to get on the ground. He seemed much more calm than the officer, and even knew the statute number that made it legal to carry his firearm in Philly.
And really, if someone yelled out "Yo junior!" and had a weapon drawn on you, you wouldn't ask why you're staring down the barrel of a gun?
I think the victims question of "Why are you pointing your weapon at me?" should have been answered before the officer's question of "Why do you have a gun on your hip?"
Pretty sure he tried to diffuse the situation as much as he could:
Officer: "Why do you have a gun on you?" Victim: "Why are threatening my life with a weapon?" Officer: "I don't know who you are and you got a gun on you!" Victim: "Would you like me to show you my license to carry firearms and my driver's license?" (the correct way to diffuse the situation would have included the officer just looking at those two items and everyone going on their merry way!) instead... Officer (to dispatch): I need back up, I got a guy with a gun on him, he's giving me a little trouble, (gives location)" Victim: "I'm gonna hand you my license to carry firearms..." Officer: "Keep your hand right where its at!" Victim: "Okay" Officer: "I don't know who you are!" Victim: "Alright" Officer: "Get down on your knees." Victim: "Excuse me?" (yes this was said with way too much attitude, probably meant to question the cop's authority) Officer: "Get down on your knees, just obey what I'm saying!" Victim: "Sir, I'm more than happy to just stand here..." (When he obviously is taking time out of his day to satisfy this cop's ego trip, notice the term of respect to start his sentence) Officer: "You make any move and I'm gonna f*&^ing shoot you!" Victim: "I'm more than happy to just stand here peacefully"
and then it just goes downhill from there when the cop gets angry because the civilian knows more about the law than he does.
Anybody remember that technique they told us to use back in elementary, COUNT TO TEN! Honestly, if that officer would have taken 10 seconds of silence to analyze the situation, I would assume he has the brains to realize that this civilian isn't trying to go on a downtown Philly massacre.
Since when is pointing a firearm at someone not threatening them?
[This message has been edited by 1988holleyformula (edited 05-17-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:01 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
When a LEO has his weapon on you, for whatever reason he feels he's in fear of his life. (may be bogus, but that's the justification) That's not when you move your hands without being expressly instructed to do so by the LEO, especially if you're armed. That's a great way to get shot.
The LEO was out of line, but the citizen made the situation worse. The police WILL control any encounter with someone. Staring down the barrel of a gun isn't the time to spout off about your rights unless you're willing to die for your rights. While it may be something worth fighting and dying for, I don't think this scenario qualifies. First order of business for both the cop and the citizen should be 1: Stay alive. Sort out everything else when the tension level is reduced.
Should you have to get on the ground if you've done nothing wrong? Absolutely not. Is refusing the cop's orders to get on the ground when he already has a gun pointed at you a good idea? Absolutely not.
I'm not defending the cop's actions, but in any encounter you can try to escalate the tension or diffuse it. Your choice.
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 05-17-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:22 PM
May 18th, 2011
FriendGregory Member
Posts: 4833 From: Palo Alto, CA, USA Registered: Jan 2004
Originally posted by 1988holleyformula: Anybody remember that technique they told us to use back in elementary, COUNT TO TEN! Honestly, if that officer would have taken 10 seconds of silence to analyze the situation, I would assume he has the brains to realize that this civilian isn't trying to go on a downtown Philly massacre.
The first thing a cop is taught is to suspect everyone, that everyone is guilty, and only the Police are right. That is why there was no "aha" moment. Once the cop drew his gun there was either going to be a shooting, or an arrest. He had to prove he had the bigger, um gun.
quote
Originally posted by Formula88:
When a LEO has his weapon on you, for whatever reason he feels he's in fear of his life. (may be bogus, but that's the justification) That's not when you move your hands without being expressly instructed to do so by the LEO, especially if you're armed. That's a great way to get shot.
The LEO was out of line, but the citizen made the situation worse. The police WILL control any encounter with someone. Staring down the barrel of a gun isn't the time to spout off about your rights unless you're willing to die for your rights. While it may be something worth fighting and dying for, I don't think this scenario qualifies. First order of business for both the cop and the citizen should be 1: Stay alive. Sort out everything else when the tension level is reduced.
I don't know where you were going with all this, but I am more than willing to die for my rights, I'll even die for your rights. I am an American, and that's what we do.
I will try common sense, but I will not let fear, and intimidation get in the way of my freedom.
I watched a special on the freedom riders last night. People fought for desegregation in the South, to be able to ride a bus. I'm not sure the exact numbers off the top of my head, but over 300 people were arrested, and put in Prison. Many were beaten, some severely. There was vigilante type attacks on Greyhound buses, drivers refused to drive "coloreds".
I'm not saying this is the same situation, or even close. But what is? At what point do we stop (literally) laying down for bad cops? When is that point? I'm pretty sure this guy was at "that point". I'll post the Quote in my next post so nobody has to "chase links".
Keep in mind he has been continually harassed by the Pittsburgh PD over the past year or so. This looks like the third time in a year, and the last time they confiscated his gun for 5 months.
Man who clashed with cops over legal gun was also armed with audio recorder
MARK FIORINO'S story has three elements that tend to get people worked up - gun rights, Philly police and YouTube.
On a mild February afternoon, Fiorino, 25, decided to walk to an AutoZone on Frankford Avenue in Northeast Philly with the .40-caliber Glock he legally owns holstered in plain view on his left hip. His stroll ended when someone called out from behind: "Yo, Junior, what are you doing?"
Fiorino wheeled and saw Sgt. Michael Dougherty aiming a handgun at him.
What happened next would be hard to believe, except that Fiorino audio-recorded all of it: a tense, profanity-laced, 40-minute encounter with cops who told him that what he was doing - openly carrying a gun on the city's streets - was against the law.
"Do you know you can't openly carry here in Philadelphia?" Dougherty asked, according to the YouTube clip."Yes, you can, if you have a license to carry firearms," Fiorino said. "It's Directive 137. It's your own internal directive."
The cops, department officials later admitted, were wrong. They didn't know that a person who has a license to carry a firearm can openly carry it in the city.
But the story doesn't end there. How could it?
After Fiorino posted his recordings on YouTube, they went viral. Members of pro-firearms forums on the Web took a particular interest in the incident.
The Police Department heard about the YouTube clips. A new investigation was launched, and last month the District Attorney's Office decided to charge Fiorino with reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct because, a spokeswoman said, he refused to cooperate with police.
Fiorino said he plans to sue the city whenever his criminal case is resolved.
Police spokesman Lt. Ray Evers said the department believes that Fiorino wanted to get into a confrontation with cops, that he wanted to see them lose their cool so he later could file a lawsuit.
Or, as one cop was overheard saying on the YouTube recording: "He set us the f--- up, that's what the f--- he did." Terrified to be powerless
Fiorino, an IT worker who lives in Montgomery County, grew up in Feltonville.
A handful of his friends fell victim to random crimes over the years - a mugging here, a beatdown there, the kind of stuff that happens all the time in a big city.
It was enough to make him think about being able to protect himself if he ever ran into trouble. "It would be terrifying to me to be powerless," he said.
So, about a year ago, Fiorino said, he got a firearms license and began openly carrying his .40-caliber Glock.
"I did research for quite a few years leading up to making a decision to carry," he said. "I was ready to take on the responsibility."
His gun went with him everywhere - to the store, you name it.
After he began carrying, Fiorino said, he was stopped a handful of times by cops in Montgomery County and other parts of the state. The encounters were civil and quick, he said, and usually ended when an officer checked out his firearms license.
He also had encounters with Philadelphia cops last year near the Philadelphia Museum of Art and on South Street.
"Both times they told me what I was doing was illegal," he said. "They patted me down and said, 'We don't care what you consent to.'
"The second time, they did an official confiscation, and it took me five months to get back my gun."
It could be argued that Fiorino should have stopped openly carrying his gun because it invited police scrutiny. But that argument couldn't be more wrong, said John Pierce, co-founder of OpenCarry.org.
Pierce, of Minnesota, said his website offers information on gun rights "from a legal perspective, a public-policy perspective, not from a 'my cold, dead fingers' viewpoint."
"According to the Pennsylvania and U.S. constitutions, open carry is Mark's right," he said.
"To say he has to give up that right in order to stop being persecuted by the state, well, that doesn't sound like the America we want to live in."
Pennsylvania allows citizens to openly carry firearms across the state, but with a simple caveat: A person who carries a weapon openly in Philadelphia also must be in possession of a firearms license.
Fiorino said he was following the law on Feb. 13, when he decided to take a walk to AutoZone while he was in the Northeast, visiting his mom.
It was a nice day, warm enough for him to head out without a jacket, leaving his holstered Glock fully exposed.
Fiorino's firearms license was in his shirt pocket, he said, along with his driver's license.
Oh, and a digital recorder.
'Get down on your knees'
Fiorino was on Frankford near Placid Street when Sgt. Dougherty spotted him from his police cruiser, stopped and called out to him.
An unnerving back-and-forth started to unfold like a bizarre routine. Dougherty would bark an order, and Fiorino would make an alternative suggestion.
Fiorino offered to show Dougherty his driver's and firearms licenses. The cop told him to get on his knees.
"Excuse me?" Fiorino said.
"Get down on your knees. Just obey what I'm saying," Dougherty said.
"Sir," Fiorino replied, "I'm more than happy to stand here -"
"If you make a move, I'm going to f------ shoot you," Dougherty snapped. "I'm telling you right now, you make a move, and you're going down!"
"Is this necessary?" Fiorino said.
It went on like that for a little while, until other officers responded to Dougherty's calls for backup.
Fiorino was forced to the ground and shouted at as he tried to explain that he had a firearms license and was legally allowed to openly carry his weapon.
"You f------ come here looking for f------ problems? Where do you live?" yelled one officer.
"I'm sorry, gentlemen," Fiorino said. "If I'm under arrest, I have nothing left to say."
"F------ a------, shut the f--- up!" the cop hollered.
The cops discovered his recorder as they searched his pockets, and unleashed another string of expletives.
Fiorino said he sat handcuffed in a police wagon while the officers made numerous phone calls to supervisors, trying to find out if they could lock him up.
When they learned that they were in the wrong, they let him go.
That might have been the end of the thing, too, if it hadn't been for the recordings.
'He did it intentionally'
The weeks passed, but Fiorino couldn't stop thinking about what had happened to him on Frankford Avenue.
"They treated me like a criminal," he said.
"The organization that's supposed to be the embodiment of the law didn't even know some of the most important laws at the street level."
He decided to put the recordings on YouTube.
"I wanted people to know this is an example of what can happen if you exercise your rights and freedom in Philadelphia," he said.
Fiorino said he didn't lay a trap for the cops. He regularly carries a recorder with him in case he ever has to use his gun and then offer proof of what transpired, he said.
"I'm not trying to set anyone up," he said.
"It was a setup. He's done this kind of thing before," said Evers, the police spokesman, referring to Fiorino's encounters with authorities. "He did it intentionally, and he audiotaped it."
Evers said the department decided to take a second look at the case after learning about the recordings.
Any number of things could have gone wrong during Fiorino's confrontation with Dougherty, Evers said.
For one thing, Evers said, Fiorino could have been shot. Cops who raced to the scene could have gotten into a car accident or injured pedestrians.
Ultimately, the D.A.'s Office decided to charge Fiorino with reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct. He's scheduled for trial in July.
Fiorino's attorney, Joseph Valvo, said the move to file criminal charges against Fiorino was retaliation for his posting the recordings on YouTube.
"They're embarrassed and using creative theories to come up with charges," he said.
Up to speed
If there is a positive to Fiorino's saga, it is this: The Police Department is trying to make sure none of its officers are ever again caught not knowing basic gun laws.
"Our officers weren't up to speed [because] we never really addressed it," said Lt. Francis Healy, the department's lawyer.
"In the last several weeks, we've done a lot of training and put out a lot of information about what is allowed and what's not allowed. Right now, our officers are better-versed on the subject matter."
Healy said he emphasized the importance of officers being polite and professional if they have to stop a person who is legally carrying a firearm.
"You can use caution, but you don't need to curse them up and down and put a gun in their face," he said.
At City Hall on Saturday, about 30 gun owners staged a protest of Fiorino's recent arrest.
Haha in reading that above posted he is using the same attorney I used during my street racing accusation that was made against me. Lets just say that if it goes anything like my trail went. He will walk out of there all charges dropped and the cop will walk out of there pretty much ready for the unemployment line . valvo is a stright up shark but he is a god send to have on your side in a court room. You wouldent know it by looking at him though. hes only about 5ft 7in tall But he handles himself very well in a court room.
Joseph Valvo works with Richard Hoy. That whole law firm is the best I have ever seen.
[This message has been edited by pontiackid86 (edited 05-18-2011).]
I suspect that charges will be dropped as it appears he was within his legal rights but, based on the audio and reports, I also believe this guy was looking to get some attention. If, he had followed the officers instructions from the get go. This would have never gone as far. Carrying a weapon openly although legal is just asking to be challenged by police especially in an area known for tougher gun laws. My son has a CCW but, he never openly carries except at the shooting range. When he has been stopped by police, the first thing out of his mouth is Officer, I am carrying, letting the officer know as soon as possible that he is not the only one with a firearm.
Was he wrong, no. Was he looking to get some attention, hell yes.
------------------ Ron
IP: Logged
07:43 AM
dsnover Member
Posts: 1668 From: Cherryville, PA USA Registered: Apr 2006
Read a little further.. "3. IN PHILADELPHIA, UNLIKE ANY OTHER PART OF THE STATE, FOR ANY PERSON TO LAWFULLY, OPENLY AND VISIBLY CARRY A FIREARM, THAT PERSON MUST HAVE A CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE. SO, IN PHILADELPHIA, IF A PERSON HAS A VALID CONCEALED CARRY FIREARMS LICENSE, HE OR SHE CAN LEGALLY CARRY A FIREARM EITHER OPEN AND VISIBLE OR CONCEALED." He did have a CCW. The police officers were the criminals this time.
Actually quite interesting, that the law is technically impossible to meet. Pennsylvania has no 'CCW' or 'Concealed Carry Firearm License'. We have a 'License to carry firearms'. It says nothing on it about concealment, although to lawfully carry concealed, you must have that license*.
* Some of us in Pennsylvania (myself included) insist that the Pennsylvania Constitution is quite clear in its verbage:
Article 1, Section 21:
"The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned."
And then further
Article 1, Section 25:
"To guard against the transgressions of the high powers which we have delegated, we declare that everything in this article is excepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever remain inviolate."
Yet somehow, we have laws against guns in PA. We have much damage to UN-do.
[This message has been edited by dsnover (edited 05-18-2011).]
IP: Logged
09:33 AM
dsnover Member
Posts: 1668 From: Cherryville, PA USA Registered: Apr 2006
Haha in reading that above posted he is using the same attorney I used during my street racing accusation that was made against me. Lets just say that if it goes anything like my trail went. He will walk out of there all charges dropped and the cop will walk out of there pretty much ready for the unemployment line . valvo is a stright up shark but he is a god send to have on your side in a court room. You wouldent know it by looking at him though. hes only about 5ft 7in tall But he handles himself very well in a court room.
Joseph Valvo works with Richard Hoy. That whole law firm is the best I have ever seen.
Unfortunately, even though the so-called 'officers of the peace' were (allegedly) guilty of 'official oppression', they most likely will only ever get some paid time off....MAYBE some desk duty. No, the sad fact is that even if the victim in this wins big in a civil rights/official oppression suit, nothing will happen to the officers. It will merely cost taxpayers more money to pay the settlement, and be yet another 'chip' on the shoulder of the Philthadelphia PD against lawful subjects citizens who wish to exercise their privileges rights.
The more slack you give bullies and thugs with a badge, the more they take. At some point you have to choose to stand your ground, because this is a system under Rule of Law, not Rule of Thugs with Badges and Guns.
Honestly, I've long ago grown tired of police officers being put up on pedestals and held out to be somehow better than the rest of the citizens of this country, and the "can do no wrong" attitude afforded them is the fundamental reason why we have the problems we have with them now. When you take ordinary people and give them power (gun, badge, backup) as well as immunity from all but the most gross misconduct you will invariably get this result: Cops who somehow think they're better human beings than the rest and who have forgotten the basic principles of "Protect and Serve".
Police officers are not special. They are not better than anyone else. They just do a job. They should be held just as accountable for their behavior in this society as everyone else.
"It was a setup. He's done this kind of thing before," said Evers, the police spokesman, referring to Fiorino's encounters with authorities. "He did it intentionally, and he audiotaped it."
Hmm, and let's see, if the cop hadn't acted like a complete tool, there would have been nothing TO "trap". Guess they don't consider that.
I can't stand cops. Far too many are self important asshats. Bunch of revenuers.
IP: Logged
10:03 AM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Originally posted by Taijiguy: "It was a setup. He's done this kind of thing before," said Evers, the police spokesman, referring to Fiorino's encounters with authorities. "He did it intentionally, and he audiotaped it."
Hmm, and let's see, if the cop hadn't acted like a complete tool, there would have been nothing TO "trap". Guess they don't consider that.
I can't stand cops. Far too many are self important asshats. Bunch of revenuers.
lol - a setup eh? this would imply that this is standard operating procedure for these officers.
if "setups" are a bad thing, how about we not allow Police to do "setups".....?
I suppose there is a certain satisfaction these officers get by shaking down law abiding citizens - them criminals are way to rambunctious......low hanging fruit?
. valvo is a stright up shark but he is a god send to have on your side in a court room. You wouldent know it by looking at him though. hes only about 5ft 7in tall But he handles himself very well in a court room.
