The problem as I see it is that there is never going to be a traffic stop where the officer wants to disarm a ccw holder which is going to be amicable to everyone.
We've heard stories of officers having the person get out of the vehicle, and then the officer personally attempts to remove the gun from a holster and ends up having problems getting the gun out of some sort of retention holster the officer is not familiar with. That always causes a lot of problems always seems to enrage the person being disarmed. The permit holder who is being tugged on and manhandled always feels it would have been better if the officer simply them unholster the gun themself and hand it to the officer.
Now we have permit holders not wanting to unholster and hand the officer the gun because for some reason they can't figure out how to do it without pointing the muzzle at themself.
No one is ever going to be happy.
Personally, I would be most comfortable if the officer would not have the person disarm at all. Just everyone leave their guns where they are, make no furtive moves, and everyone goes home happy.
However, it is the right of the officer to take possession of the gun during to course of any traffic stop and I certainly do not have a problem with that.
What I would to is simply comply with whatever way the officer chooses to handle it, and do my best to help him out anyway I can to make as uneventful a stop as possible. If the officer wants me to remove my gun and hand it to him, no problem. I have enough IQ points to be able to perform that task without pointing the muzzle at myself, the officer, or any of my passengers.
If the officer wants me to step out of the vehicle and disarm me himself, I'll do that. Personally I don't have any retention holsters for concealed carry which would make it difficult for the officer to get the gun out of my holster. However, if the officer has minimal IQ points and starts having trouble getting my gun out, I'll be happy to explain the procedure in a non-threatening and polite way and/or assist him in order to end up not getting shot.
The bottom line is that it is the officers right to take possession of your gun during any stop, and there's no point in becoming enraged about it. I can go either way without performing any dangerous manual of arms manipulation.
If the officer performs any dangerous manual of arms manipulation because he is either unfamiliar with the weapon, or holster, that is his responsibility. If a ND occurs, that's his responsibility. If he shoots me, the department is going need a big checkbook.
I'm a good guy. I don't break the law or drive like an idiot. I also have enough IQ points to know that the officer making the stop doesn't know me from Adam, nor does he know if I'm a bad guy or not. I know that. I respect that. I have the responsibility to help the officer make the traffic stop go as smoothly as possible without having a chip on my shoulder, and without giving the officer a bunch of grief and or attitude.
For the most part, I will not voluntarily consent to a search of my vehicle. I think that is going too far and I won't allow that, unless I feel circumstances warrant it, from my perspective.
If during the stop, I feel the officer is performing dangerous acts with my gun and such, I feel the way to take care of that is by going through chain of command via written communications at a later date. Certainly not at the side of the road.
I don't get pulled over very often. It's a rare occurrence for sure. I have never had a bad experience or dealt with a rude and unprofessional officer. And, I have never been disarmed by an officer at the side of the road even though I almost always have a weapon, or two, or three with me.
For the record, in my occupation, and working along side by side with LEO's all the time, I have seen some rude and unprofessional officers, so I know there are some out there. As there are with any occupation. But for me, when I am off duty and had any interaction with LEO's during traffic stops or otherwise, they have always been professional and never been an issue.
Hopefully, it will continue to go that way.
Amen to that. While Roon's earlier post came across as abrasive, s/he did raise a valid point that many of us, LEO included, have brought up in this forum on multiple occasions: that many LEO are not very gun savvy. With that in mind, handling a weapon with which one is not familiar carries a certain amount of danger. I mean absolutely no disrespect to anyone when I say this, but to fumble with such a weapon and sweep someone with it is just unacceptable and at a minimum should have consequences involving training. Similarly, asking someone you don't know, in a potentially hostile situation to hand you a loaded weapon sounds like a really, really bad idea to me for reasons that I hope are obvious. If an LEO really feels the need to disarm someone, there are better, safer ways to go about it.
Originally Posted by Guantes
To the OP, as has been stated several times here, you won't win your case on the side of the road. Your best approach would be either to hand them the weapon in the safest manner possible or request that they please disarm you themselves for both of your safety. If you believe the request was unsafe, then take the safety issue up through proper channels.
Well said Barkin, but, I do not agree that a LEO has the right to "take possession", of my property. The permit I carry is signed by the Chief LEO of my jursidiction. I am aware of no statute that allows ,confiscation, because a LEO fells threatened by my legal conduct...Look Ive got a permit to carry a concealed firearm, carrying a pistol is not a violation of any law (where I live)... In the context of a moving violation civil infraction..where do you get the probable cause for this kind of foolishness...handing loaded pistols around..on the side of the road...better be more of a reason than " I am Afraid "...
I do not agree with them having the right to take possession of my gun either. But the courts have ruled time and again, they have the right to do so for officer safety issues. So really it's a moot point. I can accept that. I don't like it, but I won't make an issue of it either. What would be the point?
Originally Posted by CaptSmith
Maybe I've just been lucky. Like I said, I've never been disarmed even with two or three guns in the car. Never had an unprofessional encounter when I was the subject of their inquiry.
I just hope it stays that way.
Wouldn't it be better if the officer removed the weapon? Maybe I am paranoid but I would not think it was a good idea for either party to have the person being stopped handle his weapon in any way.
If anything did go cross ways you would be seen on the dashcam or by passerbys "going for your weapon".
"To the OP, as has been stated several times here, you won't win your case on the side of the road. Your best approach would be either to hand them the weapon in the safest manner possible or request that they please disarm you themselves for both of your safety."
Thats what I suggested in the OP.
I think the best thing to do at that point is to hand the officer the gun sideways, as you can tilt the gun in such a way th the barrel is away from you both and the grip is more towards him.
Originally Posted by trainercb
No, I would not be touching my gun. The best conclusion would be the the officer having me step out of the vehicle and put my hands on the car, and then HE can remove my gun.
Originally Posted by dripster
Sorry for digging up an old post, but I just saw this and had to say what other occupation carries guns regularly? Maybe Security? Cops out number Security Officers 1000000 to 1.
Originally Posted by kb2wji
What do you base that on?
Originally Posted by BRTCP88
Rarely in the mood for these LEO encounter / CCW vs. cops peanut gallery threads that I so abhor here - but I will add this. I agree with Bark'n in his post. No one will ever be happy and the side of the road is not the place for you to take your stand.
I think a LEO contacting a civilian on a traffic stop boils down to this...we (LEO) are working to enforce the law and we are very HYPERVIGILANT and you (the CCW civilian) are an UNKNOWN to us, in your personal car and committing a violation that gives us the probable/reasonable/ justifiable cause to conduct a stop/lawful detention on you and your vehicle.
Just saying...HYPERVIGILANT vs. UNKNOWN in our book means we, in any way, will not let you control how our contact evolves with you. Just remember LEO's do deal with bad guys who try the same tactics. Traffic enforcement is a time honored way of nabbing criminals with narcotics, warrants, bodies, stolen goods, burglary tools and imagine this...guns.
Don't forget that a CCL/CCW permit does not automatically make you a known innocent (yet). Earn that by understanding our position, being mature, and using your intelligence to articulate your concerns to us.
Bottom line though is that the uniformed officer has control...no apologies here - it just needs to be that way.
That said there are some less than stellar LEO's out there. I hate that and encourage that a formal complaint should be filed for violations of your safety or bad demeanor towards you. Always remember the "call a road supervisor" option may help.