goldbrick Posted August 8, 2015 Share Posted August 8, 2015 When I used to be a gold dredger I had a sheet of paper that I kept in the same container as my dredge permit. This paper was a "Challenge Procedure". If you encountered a LEO that was trying to enforce his own political idealism instead of the laws enacted by Congress, you were to say " I refuse to say anything further until you read and sign this document". The document, although close to a page long, basically said " if you falsely arrest me I am going after your bond". Most LEO's are required to be bonded to hold their job. So if you prevail in a claim against their bond they may have difficulty obtaining another bond ergo bye-bye employment. The claim was most LEO"s would read it then walk away, not willing to take any risk with their job. Thankfully, I never had to use the document. In the intervening years I am afraid I have misplaced whatever copies I once possessed. Internet searches have turned up nothing, including the "Wayback Machine". I believe I originally got the document from 49er Mikes Dredging Forum, which is now defunct and mostly lost. This could be an erroneous memory though as this all transpired some time ago. Does anybody remember this? Does any one have a copy? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sourdough Scott Posted August 8, 2015 Share Posted August 8, 2015 PLP puts out a business card size info on the same lines of what you are discussing. Check out AMRA also. But I have never seen the print you mentioned. I would like a copy also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatup Posted August 8, 2015 Share Posted August 8, 2015 Yes i remember it and even had a copy and most likely still do if i can find it, since i have not been able to come dredge in California since the ban i stashed it with my last permit which was for 2007, now if i can dig it up i will post a copy . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldbrick Posted August 8, 2015 Author Share Posted August 8, 2015 Beatup, That would be wonderful if you could post it! Thanks, Merton 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatup Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 Merton, I have not been able to find that form yet still got a storage shed and my garage to go through but it's not in my house or office files. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatup Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 Merton found my old dredge permits but not the challenge form,will keep looking I know i have that copy someplace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldbrick Posted August 11, 2015 Author Share Posted August 11, 2015 Beatup, thanks for all the effort you have put into looking for the "challenge procedure"! I apologize for the tardy reply. I have been out to sea and there isn't any internet out there. When You find it, please post it up. It is appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condor Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but I am a retired LEO and there is no such thing as a bond as a condition of employment. The government's employees don't need a bond because they have qualified immunity from suit. The only way to pierce the immunity is bring a constitutional tort. For federal employees the suit is called a "Bivens Action". I am intimately familiar with this process because another federal agent and I sued our government employer for a 4th amendment unreasonable search and seizure claim as is pertains to rigged random drug testing. We won, but lost. The federal judge concluded that the government had indeed violated our 4th amendment rights, but that our government supervisors were still entitled to qualified immunity because they could not be expected to know the intricacies of the 4th amendment. It's only the friggin Constitution after all. Lawsuits are expensive and time consuming. The government will nearly always indemnify its employees acting within the scope of their employment. They can be wrong and still be protected as long as their belief was reasonable. They have unlimited resources to wear you down. I'm not bitter, but no longer naive about the concept of justice. I agree that it pays to know your rights, the laws and local regs and have those at your disposal, but it can still go wrong with the discretionary powers of the law. Coming off too strong could cause you to fail the attitude test and lead to more problems with badge happy police. Sorry for the rant but after 30 odd years of law enforcement, 27 yrs as a fed, I am still riled by the injustice of the arbitrary and capricious powers of police. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatup Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 Condor, I've got no problem with your rant you have provided some use full information and i am glad you shared, thanks. Merton,I am still looking but running out of files to search. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klunker Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 Thanks CNDR. Not a rant at all. Get me going on the flaws with the 7000 THEN YOU"LL SEE A RANT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now