in that came to our circuit from the the the problem is that in the v i i you have it's presumed that you have a right to carry a gun or it's legal unless shown otherwise delaware is just the opposite it's presumed that you don't have a right to carry a gun unless you can prove you have a license and that's the likely case which takes off from a desktop  herman as i did he didn't you know there's there's not much nuance it's right it's right in front of you it's there's a presumption that you you don't you cannot have a gun unless you end up the trial it's not really on the street this is what your standard is and there's something else about the u boats case that i think i have to bring up to the court whether there's a presumption it is ok or not ok to have a gun what the court said and you bias was that there was no evidence that the person with the gun you balls in this case posed a threat to anybody and it's the same standard that if you apply that standard here you come up with the same with the same conclusion here mr gatlin had a gun but there's no there's absolutely no evidence that he posed a threat in any way shape or form but the crime wasn't causing a threat the crime is possession of a firearm and once we have the reliability of the tip conceded doesn't that provide sufficient basis for the officer am i not i might dangerous that's at two a police officer let's say i have drugs are not armed and dangerous let's say i have you know firecrackers but if i have a gun on my person and there's a police officer who approaches should the police officer process it and say she the person's armed or don't they have a right based on the case law to think that the person is dangerous because guns are ways under the constitution having a gun does not necessarily indicate dangerousness in this case there was three minutes before the police responded to the scene and in those three minutes the police had their confidential informant on the on the phone you know they had they only had one piece of information that the man had a gun that my client had a gun in that it was loaded they didn't know if he committed a crime they didn't know if he was about to commit a crime all they firearm that they have to investigate further in other words that they cannot act on the informants to well they did both your honor they they acted because they responded to the scene but they had three minutes but they could have investigated and found out something supposing it was not a confidential informants to but an anonymous tip supposing somebody was up to for example officer can and so i was that guy over there i know has a gun there isn't the officer have in delaware now that enough in a foot you really don't reach the issue of the hand i think it's interesting that the the one person here who happens to come on the scene is probation officer cannon right along with officer birch for direct approach and cannon is this particular individual's probation officer is he not no he's not he's not but he knows him he knows his gatlin he recognizes them after he's handcuffed them and let's  if he had seen gatlin before and so the only thing so let's say for example if he had walked up and said oh i got what you know somebody reported that a guy that stress just like you with a cubs hat and whatnot has a gun on him you have a gun on you you might if i pat you down well that would be wrong would it now not at all so the only difference is that they come in and they c him and put him on the ground before they checked for the gun before they knew who he is also before they knew who he is yes although that it's almost as very shortly thereafter that they realized oh this is  or maybe they acted to do one could argue they acted too quickly but does it really make any difference to the let me say why does make a difference this is was a gun standing in front of a convenience store he's talking to cases are they really going to come out with guns drawn in that kind of a situation with people all around somebody talking to them and this man is desperate i mean i'm a little concerned about what you say get more information because sometimes police just don't have time to get more in from so what if they do get a tip that is from a credible or reliable informant but it's on the scene it's not over the phone this is actually a second point your honor and here they did have the time but if they don't have the time then they have to act on what they know but in this case with force and with a terry search that's really a proxy for a full search so you mean because it was done on the phone and they had about three or four minutes it's ok but if it's done right at the intersection of market and main street it's not ok to read to respond to an anonymous tip of somebody carrying a gun you know delaware the police always have to act on the information they have i don't know i'm sorry go ahead i'm sorry i'm a little confused by your argument i thought your argument was the fact that he had a gun even though it's presumed felony in delaware is not enough on its own for stop and frisk but now you're you're sounding like your argument is when you get a tip like this you're not allowed to come with your guns drawn and handcuff a person because that is excessive force but i don't think you made that argument in your brief video i certainly made that point several times that that's what happened on minute and that that was more that was required i thought i did with but the point is not just what happened but that that you know of itself was was wrong in effect was excessive force here i don't i don't recall that being in the bri i mean i can't point to oprah i mean i do say over and over again that that's what they did and that is you know you know if a police officer in delaware is when you hear that a person carrying a gun intersection is carrying a gun you know would you have to get you have to get a permit you have to get you have to get a license to carry you have had a chance to look at what's required you have to jump through quite a few hoops to get a permit to carry a gun so police officers you know not too many people in there in delaware have licenses to carry guns not too many people on in february at seven thirty at night leaning against a vehicle have a license to y didn't say that this was a suspicious person in the suspicious area and that therefore i don't believe you know i don't believe he had reason to have a gun it's actually unique and usually there's some something else with the part of the problem i mean the thing that doesn't feel right about this case is that they jump out of a car don't even find out who the guy is turns up one of the officers knows the person knows him almost immediately they do know checking and basically tackle the guy or close to it is that the way it's normally done in wilmington by the police officers that's not my understanding of what i'm f case is up near twenty second or twenty third and locust they woman is being robbed she tells a police officer the police officer some individuals walking down the street happens to walk out of a  commercial place and it's tackle practically and they had the wrong guy so don't you normally isn't the normal thing is to walk up and to check things out before before you defect you throw the guy to the ground concealed weapon he said right we don't know whether it's loaded we don't know whether the person is a police officer it's correct we don't know anything isn't the normal procedure to go and when you have a stop and frisk use yours you either ask questions or you stop and you get frisk i don't know the norm procedures but the governor's position is that what happened here was very reasonable to the case law basically the officers had information that there undercover f b i agent or had a license and a lot of people carry guns of license just means that the tip was not that gatlin was a fellow tip is that there's a light skinned black male chicago cubs hat with a best i think this court in valentine which was another case about a tip where the individual suspect having a gun the court said that you know diligent officers obviously have to investigate that kind of report but the court also said there would be an unreasonable to enough reasonable police officer to suspect criminal activity is afoot well certainly it's enough in delaware to suspect that this person is is committing a felony  relationship with that this person because you say that we should figure into the equation the liability that well that that provided a basis for the officer to you know reasonably suspect that what he was hearing was t has a license to carry a deadly weapon so i mean mr goldberg point is that burden comes up later on first question should be do you have me do you have a weapon on and i mean if you can and actually had done it he would realize this was gatlin gallon was a felon and he can't have a weapon then he would say ok do you have a weapon on you and proceed that way instead of cutting the person and then sort of working backwards from there think the police had no choice but to investigate this tip and i and the government's position is that first first obviously that they were reasonable in the steps that they took the force that they use there's no you know arguments are transformed into an  se and reasonable is not automatically just depends on the circumstances doesn't that's correct the circumstances here are they don't know this person's a fill in when they go up and force them to the ground they have record about whether or not it's a high crime area but there's certainly the record that there are a number of people around i would i would argue that that adds if there is a market there's usually a lot of people around that's right a fair amount and certainly that adds to the potential for danger i mean certainly this this individual could have been a lawful a citizen with a permit and doing out so nothing wrong but what the standard is not what they know you know obviously where they know that's for certain i with a read is whether they recently suspect or you know reasonable grounds to believe that this person is carrying a firearm illegally and but that's why they say turn around put your hands up on the top of the car and they frisk isn't that the procedure even if there are people around the police much different than what happened here i mean obviously he was ordered to the ground but and and hancock's but this all happened very quickly as always he does what would you say provided the reed reasonable suspicion to stop in the also you know provided a fairly detailed description of the defended the police confirmed that within minutes when their arrival but for the reliability of the tip there would not have been reasonable suspicion so yes for this person ha take out of the equation reasonable the reliability of the tip and you don't have a basis for the stop i mean the tip was the basis for the stuff so did the tip contain sufficient information should should the officer perfect obviously but i think it's reasonable to infer from the record that the testimony was this individual would call the officer when he had information about a crime and that the officer would would pay him if he investigate if the information bore out so you know i would certainly argue that it's a very strong inference that when he says i'm calling about a man with a gun that he doesn't you know doesn't think this massive police officer has a license or anything like that what if even the same information he took was i know a fellow at thirty at the market they i would argue that that is a much closer call i you know i i don't i don't think there's any presumption i'm not aware of any presumption with respect to you know prescription drugs like that whether jurisdictions if it is presumed it's on the burns on that the that the individual come forward with a license otherwise it's presumed that he's you know filing the statute with respect to the viking and i you know i don't i don't know if there's a similar presumption that would apply in that case the person here is that was known to the competent to inform what if the confidential informant calls larry the says i just was up near market and twelfth market and tenth eleventh near the hotel and i see a white male individual who flipped his jacket back and he has a gun on him what high level government official who normally carries a firearm with them and i can guarantee you as they say louisiana they are not going to go up and tackle this guy and cuff him and then see if he has a gun on him and then see if he has a license later  the that's in effect part of the investigation the question here is how do you go about that investigation in part and i i really find it hard to believe that they would investigate at eleventh and market with a white male the same that they would do with an african american to thirty of the market well i think that the the officers choices in the situation are they don't have a lot of choices quite frankly you know obviously that they want to depress you that he would say no i have a license to carry the gun i do have a gun on me and he would produce a license and it would be yes or they would know in my case with a high government official they would know who this guy is right but i don't know it seems like the law should be the same for all should it not i think it should and i have and the officer testified that he performs this procedure he said i think i believe the record is that he has done this and many times in the past and he does it every time he has a tip about a concealed firearm they put somebody on the ground uncovered that's correct speaking of the law should be the same if we were to agree with you reasonable suspicion would mean one thing in delaware and something different in the vi well how how would you reconcile the two i don't think the reasonable suspicion would be something different would just be what is it what is the legal well i'm talking about suspicion to stop somebody because you believe this criminal activity taking place and and and it seems like we're going to end up with two different standards if we adopt your position well you may end up with two different results but i think i think the stand the reason is suspicious t the same but the only reason why you have different thoughts is because one thing is well i suppose no no reasonable suspicion in the virgin islands because as individuals there are a right to carry or presume to have a valid right carry that's correct i mean saying that the burden is on the defendant does that necessarily equal presumption that anyone with a gun is committing a crime i think it does your honor and you know this court definitive answer i'm not aware of any other jurisdiction that has the type of presumption that the virgin islands has worked where this issue has come up i know that indeed in valentine that that so this court said in new jersey has a similar presumption is delaware  the court not of the presumption but then decide to decide the particular question that's probably for the rest of the way you want us to decide this case is that in delaware it is presume that if you have a gun in your possession it is illegal in that it gives a police officer reasonable suspicion to believe this criminal firearm then they have reason to special that there's something illegal afoot and you know obligate to investigate it and obligated to take the safety and you know that's sort of begs a dumb question what if the far isn't concealed so you're just walking on the street with a gun in your hand that burden then there's no burden then with lively doesn't apply right i don't know you know i know in delaware you can have a permit to carry concealed firearm i don't know if you can have a permit to carry an procedure and i said would you do it at the hotel do part of the guys wear a coat and tie and he said yes and i'm skeptical as the court is about whether or not that's true i've got to live with that is the testimony because i can't i don't know can prove otherwise i can't prove otherwise but i'm entirely skeptical about that also it's hard to believe that that's the procedure it's hard to believe that the court we can tone condone a procedure like that where  and given the importance of public safety i think i will stop there are a whole slew of cases your honor where into it that it's ok where where the police officers have said i'm in a high crime area i'm looking is looking at i'm looking at someone who is i think suspicious running away doing this doing that and you get all these factors together and then you say in that case it's more unlikely that it's more likely than not that this gun is illegal here all you have is the bare the bare knowledge that there is a gun and the other thing is in a gun case where you do or fri this is a proxy for a real search you don't have to do a root in any other case if you frisk somebody and you find no guns and you can you know and you do the rest of the investigation is there any case supporting your argument that the technique used here was a reasonable  yeah all the cases say that you should do a search in that you should do an investigation in the least intrusive manner possible but what case support you hear th versus ohio and all that for all its progeny say the same thing when you do a search you do it in the least intrusive manner possible but it's focused on the grounds for the stop in the first for somebody to ask questions maybe but then you go to the next part which is an analysis of did the police use the least intrusive means possible and you can't conclude otherwise that they didn't i