Legality of police confiscation

Yesterday at the state fair my friend made the mistake of pointing a laser pointer at a policeman. First this cop came up and growled that what we did was an arrestable offense. I say bullshit to that as he didn’t point it at his eyes or anything like that, he pointed it at his stomach. Then he took down both our names and confiscated the laser pointer.

Can he legally do that? Just take something away like that?
I know that when my brother was a kid some cop took away his wrist rocket and got away with it. How is this legal?

I am not a Wisconsin lawyer.

However, the police officer appears to be correct here: Wisconsin Stat. 941.299(2)(a) prohibits a person from:
[/quote]

Intentionally direct[ing] a beam of light from a laser pointer at any part of the body of a correctional officer or law enforcement officer without the officer’s consent…
[/quote]

Note that contrary to your theory about the eyes, the law forbids pointing a laser at the stomach as well.

Moreover, 941.299(3)(b) provides that whoever violates the above law, in addition to being guilty of a crime, is subject to a “Class B forfeiture.” I infer that this forfeiture refers to the device.

It’s legal because it is foolish and dangerous to do what your friend did. The law acts to prohibit certain kinds of foolish and dangerous practices, your misplaced outrage notwithstanding.

I welcome any corrections from person versed in Wisconsin law.

This is a general discussion of law, not an attempt to offer you specific legal advice about your situation. For that, consult a lawyer licensed to practice in your jurisdiction. You are not my client. I am not your lawyer.

  • Rick

Here is the complete text of the statute. More to the point is this paragraph:

Bolding mine.

Cops do not like laser pointers one tiny little bit. They don’t know if a laser dot on them is from a keychain pointer or a laser sight on a pistol, and will generally assume it’s the latter for safety’s sake.

Many states now have or are enacting laws to make it illegal for persons under the age of 18 to purchase and/or possess a laser pointer for this very reason.

Just because you think a law is foolish, Hayduke, that doesn’t mean it’s not a law.

–Cliffy

Allright, I stand corrected.I guess it was illegal. I didn’t know that, and the cop didn’t explain it. He just said it was an arrestable offense.

But what about him taking the pointer away? My friend is 19 and can legally have it, and he wasn’t charged with anything.

Can the cop still take it away from him? What law allows that?

Read Bricker’s post again.

And surely if something is an “arrestable offense”, then by definition it is illegal.

What do you think an “arrestable offense” is? I’m not sure how you wanted the cop to “explain it” any more thoroughly.

Did you not read my post above?

I’m genuinely curious. Did your eyes just sort of skip over this line the first time? Or was it unclear?

  • Rick

What I meant was, the cop didn’t explain that there was a specific law regarding aiming a laser pointer. We thought he was just calling it assault or disorderly conduct or something like that.
At the time, I couldn’t figure how pointing it at his gut was assault.
And I think you guys are wrong about the foreiture thing. I think that means it’s a fine, not a siezure of property. If it meant a siezure, why would there be a class A, B, C…etc.? Explain.

I’m pretty sure police officers are not required to explain the laws they are enforcing. Ignorance of the law is not a defense.

I googled class b forfeiture. It looks like the difference is in the maximum dollar value of the object being siezed.

Class A: < $5000
Class B: < $1000
Class C: < $100

link

That’s just an example, it was just the first link google gave me.

Of course, my link doesn’t make the distinction if this is an object being forfeited or a monetary fine. Hopefully, someone will be by to give us the SD.

Sheesh, whats with all the smug hostility? The question wasn’t completely invalid. If a LEO were to tell me that zapping him with a laser pointer was an “arrestable offense”, took the thing, and that was it, my probable impression would be that he was referencing “assaulting an officer” or something to that effect. I’d probably be skeptical as well, and assume the officer was interpreting the law in a pretty farfetched way. If he had cited the actual law regarding laser pointers, the situation would have been far more clear and Hayduke wouldn’t have wondered whether what took place was kosher.