Got pulled over by a rookie today
This is a discussion on Got pulled over by a rookie today within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; It seems to me the LEO's should worry about those that don't advise them they are armed. Those that advise they are, have given up ...
April 6th, 2008 01:18 PM
It seems to me the LEO's should worry about those that don't advise them they are armed. Those that advise they are, have given up any advantage they might have had. It is illogical for them to give away their primary advantage if they intend to cause harm.
"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." - Thomas Jefferson
April 6th, 2008 01:45 PM
"It was about this time I noticed that she was really pretty!! "
"I kinda hope I see her again offduty!"
Yea, I don't think you should let this incident go by without making some noise, preferably from your cell phone to hers. LOL.
April 6th, 2008 01:50 PM
for good reason, one that can be articulated, i agree it should be within the officers discretion.
making it the rule is ridiculous.
transferring control of a firearm even for 15 minutes, should constitute additional paperwork on the part of the officer. that would definitely keep down nuisance "why bother using my powers of observation and judgement here.... i'll just gank this guys piece and draw out a simple 45 ina 35....."
if there was good reason to do so, this doesnt seem at all unreasonable.
i know sixto doesnt make it a habit to disarm people,- ive yet to meet, personally, any LEO that does.
April 6th, 2008 02:23 PM
These situations are like carry in general...it's about responsibility. If stopped for a traffic violation and I'm armed, I know that I am not a threat to the officer, so will choose to not flash my permit and announce that I'm carrying. In my state I don't have to, and choose not to unless asked, in which case I will comply as required by law.
Yes, that officer will go home at the end of their shift, since I am no threat to his/her safety. Sorry, though, there will be no gun handling by the LEO, no baggies, none of that...not even a story about how I got a warning instead of a ticket because I announced my armed status.
C'mon, LEOs, give us law-abiding citizens some credit rather than thinking that it has to all be your way because of how BGs behave. Just like you, we are the good guys!
"It's a big gun when I carry it, it is also a big gun when I take it out” – Clint Smith
April 6th, 2008 02:36 PM
She should not have disarmed you. All that weapon handling could have resulted in a ND. Glad she didn't flip, but I don't agree with her methods.
Why Ike, whatever do you mean? Maybe poker's just not your game Ike. I know! Let's have a spelling contest!
April 6th, 2008 02:38 PM
Well, she did remove the weapon and holster herself, right? You could get a Smartcarry...
Originally Posted by flagflyfish
“What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia
SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry, P226R Navy, P226, P239/.40S&W, P2022/.40S&W; GSR 5", P6.
April 6th, 2008 03:28 PM
I think you have a tough job and you probably do your best at it, but I still disagree. The comments you made above apply in ANY situation even if you're just walking past joe blow in the street. You DONT know them from adam. So do you make it your policy to disarm everyone you meet in passing? I'm guessing not, because A) it's pretty damn foolish and setting someone up for an ND, and B) there's just no need.
Originally Posted by SIXTO
What would you do if you passed a guy carrying openly in a state like VA with his wife and 3 kids in tow?
A policy of disarming everyone you stop just adds problems to the list. You've got the issue of ND's (from both the officer AND the person they stopped when they go to reload later), and the issue of potentially escalating some hothead which you don't want either.
I can MAYBE go along with you with disarming someone at a stop IF the firearm remains HOLSTERED and loaded. That's the big issue I have. WE don't know you from adam either and it's very apparent that not all LEO's know all the workings of various types of firearms other than the one they're issued. They're human just like us and can screw up...just like us. The idea of repeated loading and unloading of ccw's on the side of the road is a really bad idea.
"My God David, We're a Civilized society."
"Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the crap out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
-The Mist (2007)
April 6th, 2008 03:49 PM
I don't think that people should be disarmed unless they're being arrested. In the big picture, it is The People's safety and rights that should be protected and preserved. The People pay LEOs to do a job that is inherently dangerous. If we were all restricted from leaving our houses, an Officer's job would be a lot safer -- but that doesn't make any sense. The People's safety and rights should not be trampled upon to make the job less dangerous.
If I go for my gun, do your job and shoot me. Otherwise, why create a new danger by attempting to disarm someone and handling a strange weapon?
Worst case scenario: Officer shoots himself with your gun, your bullets, and your fingerprints on the weapon.
Nothing is truly gained by disarming speeders.
April 6th, 2008 04:38 PM
The key difference between everyone and the traffic stop is that I'm not investigating everyone I pass by, but I am the person I've stopped. I'm investigating a crime, it doesnt matter how minor it might be.
Originally Posted by packinnova
I agree 100% that there is no need to disarm a typical CCW holder at a typical traffic stop. But, things get non typical really quick. I certainly understand why some feel its a better idea to disarm.
I teach my rookie's I FTO this way, (not to disarm, unless you have a specific reason too) but some have chosen to go the other way once on their own... its just a matter of opinion, and certainly within reason for an LEO to do so.
April 6th, 2008 04:49 PM
Nope, not wrong at all. Terry v. Ohio gives the officer the lawful authority to search you for weapons and secure same for their safety.
Originally Posted by Kerbouchard
Think about it a moment - you have a card that says you are can carry lawfully, but how does the officer know that your CCW is still valid? You could have committed a violation and had the CCW revoked - but you still have the card itself.
And what could you have done since then? Practically anything.
Originally Posted by Kerbouchard
This isn't a meeting of equals, where you get to make decisions on what you feel like doing. Technically, you have been detained when you are stopped. You are not free to leave. You are in the temporary custody of the officer until you have been advised you are free to leave.
Originally Posted by Kerbouchard
If the officer elects to disarm you, that is absolutely their prerogative. It is perfectly lawful for them to do so, as noted above. Resisting such an act would be very foolish indeed, and would probably lead to a felony conviction.
Battle Plan (n) - a list of things that aren't going to happen if you are attacked.
Blame it on Sixto - now that is a viable plan.
April 6th, 2008 04:50 PM
How did some of the LE posters on this forum every pass their psycological profile? Or don't they need to?
Originally Posted by Kerbouchard
April 6th, 2008 05:36 PM
Most states ALLOW officers to maintain control of weapons during traffic stops.
Some agencies have policies that require it. (I disagree with that, and I'm glad I don't work for one of them)
My approach is, "You don't show me yours, and I won't show you mine." That being said, if the driver I was dealing with was a known knucklehead who somehow managed to get a CCW permit, I'd like to have the legal ability to disarm Mr. Knucklehead temporarily, until business is concluded.
Not that I'd necessarily USE that ability, because the logistics of doing so create MORE risk than leaving the gun where it is......UNLESS Mr. Knucklehead is really starting to "be himself".
April 6th, 2008 05:44 PM
Many agencies don't even do psych screening, relying instead upon interviews and medical exams.
Originally Posted by HowardCohodas
I have no idea why, that's just the way it is in some places.
That being said, crazy people don't know they're crazy. Only others know that. At the same time, crazy people believe sane folks to be crazy.
If you think about it, that's a really scary thought. Every time you encounter a nutball, some part of you just HAS to wonder: is it really THEM.......or is it ME?
April 6th, 2008 05:47 PM
Sounded like a pretty good outcome...
This is another example of why I do not notify of my carry status, unless asked to exit the vehicle. I don't see any need to disarm someone that is not giving the slightest physical signs of anxiety. That just ups the chance of an ND during the stop.
April 6th, 2008 06:06 PM
I don't understand. As a licensed concealed carrier, I have to identify myself to an officer while sitting in my car where it is legal to have a weapon. However, somone who does not posess a weapon permit can still have a weapon legally in his car and does not have to inform anyone. I'm proven to be a good citizen and nobody knows squat about the other guy! Seems bass ackward and totally irrational to me!
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ... they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Thomas Jefferson
By redrick in forum General Firearm Discussion
Last Post: July 17th, 2008, 03:23 PM
By TXGLOCK29 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: June 7th, 2008, 04:12 AM
By Chaddae52 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: September 6th, 2007, 01:26 PM
Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.