Man sues Atlanta Transit Authority over gun

**Norm357** · 03-06-09, 01:36 AM

The ajc.com reports....

Man with gun sues MARTA after being detained
By BILL RANKIN

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Thursday, March 05, 2009

A man detained after entering a MARTA station wearing a holstered firearm sued the transit agency Thursday, accusing it of illegal search and seizure.

The federal lawsuit was filed on behalf of Christopher Raissi and the gun-rights group, GeorgiaCarry.org.

Raissi was detained by MARTA police as he entered the Avondale station Oct. 14 with his firearm, the lawsuit said. The handgun was inside Raissi’s T-shirt and must have been exposed when he dropped his MARTA fare card and bent down to pick it up, said his lawyer John Monroe.

MARTA officers surrounded Raissi, seized the weapon and demanded to know why he was carrying a gun, the suit said.

Raissi showed the officers his Georgia firearms license and driver’s license and, at their request, gave them his Social Security number. He was escorted to another building, held about 30 minutes and released with his gun.

The officers had no probable cause or reasonable suspicion Raissi was committing, or about to commit a crime, the suit said. It noted the Georgia Legislature last year passed House Bill 89, which decriminalized the carrying of firearms on public transit.

MARTA does not comment on pending litigation, spokeswoman Cara Hodgson said.

Last summer, MARTA notified its customers about the new law. It also said the law requires anyone carrying a firearm on public transit to have a valid firearms license. MARTA police will strictly enforce all provisions of the law, the transit agency said.

**Rhino** · 03-06-09, 11:55 AM

I hope this guys wins. It's time the liberals got a taste of their own medicine.

I don't feel safe on MARTA if I don't have a firearm.

**Morris** · 03-06-09, 12:07 PM

This was an expected event. OpenCarry.org - A Right Unexercised is a Right Lost!

Anyway, he will get a rollover by MARTA as they won't go to trial on this. But it will cause a ruckus.

**Retdetsgt** · 03-06-09, 01:03 PM

Was this a result of their policy or just some overzealous transit cops? Unless there is some kind of special law excluding legal CCW, these guys were flat wrong.

I bet MARTA is just negotiating the amount it will take to make this guy go away.

**MacLean** · 03-06-09, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by Retdetsgt

Was this a result of their policy or just some overzealous transit cops? Unless there is some kind of special law excluding legal CCW, these guys were flat wrong.

The group Morris posted is actively challenging policy decisions that are in conflict with the State laws that allow carry.

I don't like their tactics, but I understand why they are doing it and wish them well, in general.

Their goal around here has largely been to educate police officers.

They are very active in certain States, less so in others.

**Retdetsgt** · 03-06-09, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by maclean

The group Morris posted is actively challenging policy decisions that are in conflict with the State laws that allow carry.

I understand that. My question is, was it policy or just cops acting on their own?

**MacLean** · 03-06-09, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Retdetsgt

I understand that. My question is, was it policy or just cops acting on their own?

It runs about 75% cops and 25% policy.

A lot of officers just don't understand the gun laws where they work, and the younger ones have been brought up now believing only cops should have guns.

We got into this once before on this board, when I pointed out to some officers on this board that even openly carrying was legal where they worked, and one of them insisted to the very end that it just wasn't so.

Gun laws are complex, and a great deal of officers simply believe they are what they think they are.

Morris and I developed a training plan to keep our guys out of the fire on this issue, and even then one who lateraled to another agency still disregarded what we taught him.

The other 25% is cities passing stupid policies like "no guns here" that run contrary to the laws of their state.

**Retdetsgt** · 03-06-09, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by maclean

It runs about 75% cops and 25% policy.

Not to belabor the point, but how can it be 25% policy? Is there a policy or not against having guns on the transit lines? Policy should be yes or no.

**MacLean** · 03-06-09, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Retdetsgt

Not to belabor the point, but how can it be 25% policy? Is there a policy or not against having guns on the transit lines? Policy should be yes or no.

Oh, I'm sorry - you meant this SPECIFIC situation with your question.

I thought it was more general about ALL the times this happens.

I'm afraid I can't say in this instance, only the others in my area I am familiar with.

**Retdetsgt** · 03-06-09, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by maclean

Oh, I'm sorry - you meant this SPECIFIC situation with your question.

That's okay, I'm easily distracted in my old age.....

**Rhino** · 03-06-09, 06:31 PM

From what I understand MARTA isn't 100% private, as it does recieve funds from the state and has it's own law enforcement.

To answer your question, it's against MARTA regulations to carry a weapon on the trains/buses. But I assure you there are thugs that violate this policy routinely. They just aren't getting caught as often as the otherwise law-abiding citizen.

**Retdetsgt** · 03-06-09, 06:53 PM

Originally Posted by Rhino

To answer your question, it's against MARTA regulations to carry a weapon on the trains/buses. But I assure you there are thugs that violate this policy routinely. They just aren't getting caught as often as the otherwise law-abiding citizen.

Thanks, that what I was trying to find out.

And of course, gun control laws always only effect the people willing to obey them. With the exception of a few DV cases, I can't recall a single other case where the bad guy got their gun from a legitimate dealer.

**drunkhunter** · 03-06-09, 06:54 PM

I've read the firsthand account of this from the individual that was detained. He is a member of a carry organization, but said organization is not officially affiliated with the Open Carry crowd.

The group handling the suit is GeorgiaCarry.org. GCO is primarily aimed at improving GA's carry laws in favor of those that choose to carry guns.

Prior to last year, it was illegal to carry a firearm even with a license on public transit. GCO did contact MARTA when the law changed to try to find out what MARTA's official policy would be to "man with a gun" calls. At some point and time in the discussions with MARTA after this incident, MARTA ceased all communication, which prompted the suit.

If I remember correctly, the guy was carrying concealed. Either his gun printed or his shirt came up when he bent over to pick up something revealing his gun. An officer made contact and the gun was removed from the guy's holster. He showed his ID and Georgia Firearm's License when requested, but he was still detained for 30 minutes prior to being released.

A brief stop to check somebody carrying like that is reasonable in the current environment. However, state court decisions specify that the mere carrying of a firearm is not reason enough to stop a person based solely upon them carrying.

---
For those here from GA, please contact me via PM for some Georgia Carry info. I could actually use the help of some other officers.

**MacLean** · 03-06-09, 07:06 PM

Originally Posted by drunkhunter

A brief stop to check somebody carrying like that is reasonable in the current environment. However, state court decisions specify that the mere carrying of a firearm is not reason enough to stop a person based solely upon them carrying.

This statement seems to be at odds with itself...

**drunkhunter** · 03-06-09, 07:35 PM

Originally Posted by maclean

This statement seems to be at odds with itself...

I agree with your assessment. It is at literal odds with itself.

I think it is reasonable to walk up and ask to see a GFL or just strike up a conversation.

Detaining somebody is another thing. We tend to forget that it is perfectly legal to ask someone to talk to us or to just walk up and start talking to them.

It's amazing what you can learn with a smile on your face and a few non-confrontational words, but sadly, many of our brethren have forgot that.

I did word it as a "brief stop", which implies a non-consensual encounter, but if you do it right it can be completely consensual.

**Retdetsgt** · 03-06-09, 07:43 PM

Originally Posted by drunkhunter

However, state court decisions specify that the mere carrying of a firearm is not reason enough to stop a person based solely upon them carrying.

I'm glad Oregon didn't have that ruling when I was working. I don't think I ever gaffed someone up for carrying a gun that had a legit permit. And I sure made a number of felony arrests based solely upon them carrying.

**drunkhunter** · 03-06-09, 08:43 PM

Originally Posted by Retdetsgt

I'm glad Oregon didn't have that ruling when I was working. I don't think I ever gaffed someone up for carrying a gun that had a legit permit. And I sure made a number of felony arrests based solely upon them carrying.

We get programed from day one at the academy that people with guns are out to kill us, and we (imperial we) tend to view everyone with a gun in that capacity, and too many of us just don't think about how to approach someone legally carrying a firearm. Too many officers and too much of the public see a firearm and immediately think death and destruction is soon to follow.

**Five-0** · 03-06-09, 08:49 PM

Show me a Carry License, let me know you are armed and I will cut you a break on most minor traffic offenses. I will most certainly give you all the respect you give me on any contact. I learned that lesson from cops before I became one.

**Retdetsgt** · 03-06-09, 08:50 PM

Originally Posted by drunkhunter

WToo many officers and too much of the public see a firearm and immediately think death and destruction is soon to follow.

That's very true. I found early on though that easing up to situations like that worked better than immediately pulling my gun and escalating a situation. I generally approached them lightly, if possible and secured them and/or the gun with minimum fuss and ado until I find out what the deal was.

Today, I might get killed, I dunno. But bullshitting has always been my strong suit and I used it whenever I possibly could.

**Norm357** · 03-06-09, 09:27 PM

Originally Posted by Retdetsgt

I'm glad Oregon didn't have that ruling when I was working. I don't think I ever gaffed someone up for carrying a gun that had a legit permit. And I sure made a number of felony arrests based solely upon them carrying.

Don't know about Oregon, but GA is an open carry state and a lot of folks choose to do so. The Cops have better things to do than stopping every person they see carrying a gun.

Drunkhunter pretty much covered everything else.

MARTA got their panties twisted when the law was changed last year to allow citizens to carry on the bus and train. They were pretty vocal about being against it. I'm sure some direcctive was issued from the powers that be to harass any person found carrying.