Words nearly fail me.
A
Federal Judge ruled today on a GCO case relating to police stopping individuals who are seen carrying a concealed firearm on MARTA Trains today. He ruled in favor of MARTA for the most part stating that it was legal and lawful for a police officer to stop and detain someone to confirm they were carrying a license allowing the concealed carry of a firearm.
In this case, the MARTA police more than stopped the individual, they in fact, stopped and detained them and harrassed them for more than a half an hour. Long after they confirmed the person had a State issued GFL (Georgia Firearms License) they still detained him. This goes beyond the scope of what the judge said is allowed and yet he ignores the facts as described in the decision.
What is disturbing about this, is that this case seems to fly in the face of
US v Ubiles and
State v Jones. In both cases the Supreme Courts of the US and of Georgia (respectively) determined that an officer must witness some illegal activity and that carrying of a firearm (a lawful activity) was not valid evidence of a crime.
Further, in Jones, the officer doesn't have lawful authority to take a firearm and conduct further investigations upon said firearm (run the serial number) without some other reasonable articulable suspicion that it is in fact stolen. Probable cause is warranted before a criminal investigation can begin. This is basic US Jurisprudence.
Put another way, driving a car is not a crime, even if you must have a license to drive one. An officer CANNOT simply stop someone to determine if they are driving without a license unless they are checking everyone at a "road safetly checkpoint" and those stops are mandated as being VERY short in duration. They cannot pull you for an hour to "Check your license" a task that take a mere moment to confirm.
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
relaxed
