Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 59 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I left Florida The other day to go to N.C. and got about half way and got stopped for speeding (not me). When the trooper approached my vehicle I had both hands on the wheel and advised him I was carrying and he asked if I had a license. Then told me slowly to get out of my vehicle while his hand was on his weapon which I understood perfectly. He then told me to put my hands on the hood while he removed my weapon still has not ask for my license. I was still Ok with it. Then he ask for my license both driving and CCW. He then said for his protection cuffed me and put me in his car. Know at this time beginning to worry. I was a former police officer. He checked my record and then said that the Florida license were no good in S.C. I said that S.C. was a reciprocal state and he said that if they are he does not know it. I told him I had something in my wallet that could prove it. I printed out a page from the internet a while back that showed the states that were. He read it and told me he was sorry and to be on my way with no ticket. He was doing his job and in my book did what he should have done. Glad I printed it out to keep. Laws from different states can get really confusing because I have been in those situations before. I followed his request did not give him any trouble and that is the way to act in those situations.:congrats:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,226 Posts
I personally think LEO's should know what other states in their region recognize each other's CHLs. I mean, SC isn't that far from FL. It's not like you were from Alaska, Oregon, Kansas, Delaware.... etc etc....

Sounds pretty excessive to me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,579 Posts
grifft,

Glad everything turned out alright for you.

Question for the LEO's. Is it common practice in this type of situation to handcuff some one? I can understand putting them in the cruiser, but torestrain the individual without any other reason that a possible traffic violation seems extreme. I understand they all intend to go home at the end of the shift, but if they have already taken the weapon, where is the immediate danger? I'm not criticizing, just looking for a little education here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
Looks like a textbook stop to me. The laws concerning reciprocity are always changing. Of course CCWers would know it, because it's the one law that they are concerned about when carrying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,261 Posts
Sounds like a letter or call to his Chief is in order and send the trooper back to school to learn the laws. If they are to enforce law, they need to know the law. He wasn't "doing his job" as you state.

His ignorance of law is no excuse, sounds like poor training to me. He shouldn't have cuffed you and placed you into his car as if you were some common criminal either. I wouldn't let him not giving a ticket influence a decision to call his Superior's and report him.

What if this "fool" decided that you were a gun-toting menace and decided to draw his own weapon and potentially shoot you, even after you have informed him of the weapon? This just isn't good all around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,226 Posts
because it's the one law that they are concerned about when carrying.
Really? I think there's more than that... Heck, where and where you can't carry in your own state can get pretty complicated at times... Not to mention other states if you're traveling.

What about deadly force laws? How about if your state has a "duty to retreat", a "castle doctrine", "must inform LEO" law...

All citizens are supposed to know the law, are we not? Ignorance of the law is no excuse. So not only should LEO's know the law because it's their job, but they're also citizens.

Now we can't expect LEO's or Citizens to know every law, but some biggies are necessary. Like what nearby states licenses are honored by your state.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
Sounds like a letter or call to his Chief is in order and send the trooper back to school to learn the laws. If they are to enforce law, they need to know the law. He wasn't "doing his job" as you state.

His ignorance of law is no excuse, sounds like poor training to me. He shouldn't have cuffed you and placed you into his car as if you were some common criminal either. I wouldn't let him not giving a ticket influence a decision to call his Superior's and report him.

What if this "fool" decided that you were a gun-toting menace and decided to draw his own weapon and potentially shoot you, even after you have informed him of the weapon? This just isn't good all around.
While you make some fairly good points, look at it from the LEO's perspective.

1) He has to know as many laws and about as much about the law as a lawyer. Problem is, he has to make split second decisions based upon that knowledge, and does not have the luxury of a law library and plenty of time.

2) Most LEO's deal with the dregs of society on a regular basis. Just because you consider yourself one of the good guys doesn't mean the LEO can ascertain that on first glance.

3) He wants to go home at night. If it means a little discomfort and inconvenience on the part of the citizen then maybe that's little enough to ask for executing a dangerous and thankless job.

4) It's easy to be an armchair cop when you aren't wearing his moccasins.

5) If you ("you" being used collectively) don't want to be inconvenienced, don't break the law.

6) Seems to me the OP has the right attitude.

I'm not a LEO, never have been one, don't play one on TV or in the movies. I'm too much of a wuss to put up with the kind of crap these guys put up with. I did, however, spend a lot of time working with Police Agencies all over North America. Before I retired, I worked for a mobile computing company which specialized in Public Safety. I have a very small idea of what the average LEO goes through on a normal day. It's real easy to say what should be when you have the luxury of not having to make the decisions or live by the decisions you make.

YMMV, Void where prohibited, the preceding does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the management.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
While you make some fairly good points, look at it from the LEO's perspective.

1) He has to know as many laws and about as much about the law as a lawyer. Problem is, he has to make split second decisions based upon that knowledge, and does not have the luxury of a law library and plenty of time.

2) Most LEO's deal with the dregs of society on a regular basis. Just because you consider yourself one of the good guys doesn't mean the LEO can ascertain that on first glance.

3) He wants to go home at night. If it means a little discomfort and inconvenience on the part of the citizen then maybe that's little enough to ask for executing a dangerous and thankless job.

4) It's easy to be an armchair cop when you aren't wearing his moccasins.

5) If you ("you" being used collectively) don't want to be inconvenienced, don't break the law.

6) Seems to me the OP has the right attitude.

I'm not a LEO, never have been one, don't play one on TV or in the movies. I'm too much of a wuss to put up with the kind of crap these guys put up with. I did, however, spend a lot of time working with Police Agencies all over North America. Before I retired, I worked for a mobile computing company which specialized in Public Safety. I have a very small idea of what the average LEO goes through on a normal day. It's real easy to say what should be when you have the luxury of not having to make the decisions or live by the decisions you make.

YMMV, Void where prohibited, the preceding does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the management.
A decent argument, and we dont know all the facts of the stop (ie, was the officer looking for the OP's type and color of vehicle from a previous crime, etc), but once he has told the officer he is carrying, it would make sense, in this day and age, to ask for his CHL. Police officers by and large are extremly adept at spoting trouble based on body language, inflection in the voice, ect. From what we are told, I think the detention was a tad excessive for the situation....IMHO, YMMV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,866 Posts
I can imagine that the LEOs do not know all laws concerning reciprocity all over the US, but I think that SC is close enough to justify the fact that he should know it; he should know the reciprocity laws from all nearby states.

I perfectly understand that LEOs must be very careful because they have to deal with a lot of idiots that are only waiting for a chance to shoot, but I believe that what he did was not right. He already had taken your weapon, then why were you put in handcuffs?
I do not like to make problems for anyone, and above all I do not like to make problems for people whose jobs are to make the streets safe, but in this case I should call his superior's and report him.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
908 Posts
While you make some fairly good points, look at it from the LEO's perspective.
The LEO's "perspective" is utterly irrelevant. The only thing that's relevant is the law.

1) He has to know as many laws and about as much about the law as a lawyer. Problem is, he has to make split second decisions based upon that knowledge, and does not have the luxury of a law library and plenty of time.
EVERYBODY has to know the law. If you violate it, not knowing it isn't an excuse.

It's the LEO's JOB to know the law. The idea that he has LESS of a duty to know the law than any citizen is simply absurd.

If there are "too many" laws for the cop to know, there are too many for YOU to know. Think that cop or any court would buy that excuse? I didn't think so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
763 Posts
The LEO's "perspective" is utterly irrelevant. The only thing that's relevant is the law.


EVERYBODY has to know the law. If you violate it, not knowing it isn't an excuse.

It's the LEO's JOB to know the law. The idea that he has LESS of a duty to know the law than any citizen is simply absurd.

If there are "too many" laws for the cop to know, there are too many for YOU to know. Think that cop or any court would buy that excuse? I didn't think so.
As I said, YMMV.

The idea that he has LESS of a duty to know the law than any citizen is simply absurd.
Don't know where the above statement was found in my post.

What's really relevant at the scene is the LEO's perspective and his interpretation of the law. The foregoing might not be relevant in a court of law, but is sure is at the scene. Again, my opinion.

... If there are "too many" laws for the cop to know,...
That was found where in my post?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,226 Posts
That was found where in my post?
I think he was referring to the following quote...
1) He has to know as many laws and about as much about the law as a lawyer. Problem is, he has to make split second decisions based upon that knowledge, and does not have the luxury of a law library and plenty of time.
5) If you ("you" being used collectively) don't want to be inconvenienced, don't break the law.
TC didn't break the law (with the exception of possibly speeding) and he was inconvenienced. I just think taking his weapon(s) was enough to ensure the officer's safety. Obviously the TC was very cooperative.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
I was stopped a couple of months back on 95 in SC by a State Trooper. He asked me if i had any weapons in the vehicle and I informed him that I had an unloaded shotgun behind my seat, he asked me to step out of the vehicle and stand by the front of his cruiser. I complied he removed the shotgun and ran the serial number. After he finished he placed the shotgun back into the truck and gave me my ticket (speeding 82 in 70:hand1:) and told me to have a good day.

I felt a little out of place standing in front of the car but he wasn’t rude.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
908 Posts
What's really relevant at the scene is the LEO's perspective and his interpretation of the law.
His "interpretation" must be a REASONABLE one based on a facial reading of the text of the law. If he doesn't bother to KNOW the law, that's simply impossible.

He needs to know the law he's ENFORCING, RIGHT NOW or he needs to find another job.

The foregoing might not be relevant in a court of law, but is sure is at the scene. Again, my opinion.
Actually, it's VERY relevant in a court of law, particularly a civil court, if the cop, having decided that he doesn't need to know the law, commits a crime or civil tort against a citizen, based on that willful ignorance.

EVERYBODY needs to know relevant law. Not knowing or not wanting to know, is NEVER an excuse, for cop or citizen. Nobody should expect "breaks" when they adopt the attitude that they don't need to know the law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,514 Posts
Sounds like a letter or call to his Chief is in order and send the trooper back to school to learn the laws. If they are to enforce law, they need to know the law. He wasn't "doing his job" as you state.

His ignorance of law is no excuse, sounds like poor training to me. He shouldn't have cuffed you and placed you into his car as if you were some common criminal either. I wouldn't let him not giving a ticket influence a decision to call his Superior's and report him.

What if this "fool" decided that you were a gun-toting menace and decided to draw his own weapon and potentially shoot you, even after you have informed him of the weapon? This just isn't good all around.
actually he was doing his job, easy on the 'fool' name calling
he can put you in cuffs in the car for his safety, thats his discretion, not saying its right or wrong, IMO it was overboard, but it is an option

now that being said....would I have done that......no
if I had reason to believe a person's permit wasn't valid in my state I'd be on the phone with dispatch to get it confirmed not go off the word of someone or some internet printout.....how would a LEO know that is valid? just something to think about, maybe that needs to be communicated to the supervisor, etc....that they need to check with dispatch to confirm reciprocity if they don't know
we don't get updates on reciprocity, just not info they give us updates on, but its only a phone call away, doesn't make any LEO a fool

if its me on a stop and they say they have a permit and carrying, I'll get their permit, go back to my car and run everything, if its out of state permit I'll have dispatch check for reciprocity, if no reciprocity then I'd most likely tell them their permit is not recognized but they are legal to carry in their car :smile:, ....but thats me
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
481 Posts
My instructor has had a similar thing happen to him - but in the state of his residence. He said it's pretty common for new officers to do that, but also to keep in mind that we have no idea what that officer has been through. He may have had a gun pulled on him the day before. I think that would make me a bit more nervous, you? They're allowed (in KY - at least as far as I know) to ask you to exit the vehicle, and to remove your weapon before continuing their traffic stop. I'm not excusing this particular LEOs actions, or his ignorance of reciprocity, just trying to see the other side.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,336 Posts
He then told me to put my hands on the hood while he removed my weapon still has not ask for my license. I was still Ok with it. Then he ask for my license both driving and CCW. He then said for his protection cuffed me and put me in his car.
As a former LEO myself I've got to say that's a load of BS. No one should be cuffed and stuffed for legally carrying a firearm. Disarming you for following the law shows a lack of courtesy, the bad guys don't tell LEO that they're armed do they.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
It is very simple, he detained the OP until he realized no crime had been committed. Once he realized no crime had been committed he released the OP and sent him on his merry way.

This happens THOUSANDS of times a day in the US and the officer was well within his rights. Glad the OP understands. Being prior LEO probably helps out though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,185 Posts
I consider myself a staunch supporter of LE, however, the situation as stated is not excusable with the handcuffs. With all the news regarding the carrying of weapons all LEOs should have such things as reciprocity with them. I realize they cannot know all of it, but they can have a list of reciprocal states along with the other laws in their cars.

Just doing his job includes knowing, and having immediately available, the law.

I agree that a letter to his chief is in order. If the OP had not had a copy of the law/reciprocity he would have had to endure an even more unpleasant experience.

Regards,
Jerry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
571 Posts
National Concealed Carry reform would completely resolve this issue. At least you had an LEO that was willing to admit he didn't know and accept your explanation.
 
1 - 20 of 59 Posts
Top