Dissarmed by officer upon traffic stop ? Wilson NC. WTF ?

Considering even my lawyer confirms that there is no legal authority in the state of Indiana for a police officer to disarm a LTCH carrier without at least RAS, I would think it would go quite well.

Some of these responses floor me. It might go quite well in court 6 months later, but I assure you it would be a disaster for you on the side of the road. LTCH or not, an officer has the right to separate himself from a weapon.

In these parts, telling an LEO that you will not relinquish your weapon will get you face down on the pavement in a hurry and an obstruction charge that will stick, not to mention revocation of your permit. My guess is that it would be about the same in Indiana.
 
And when the cruiser cam audio and video of my demanding RAS is admitted in court, it'll be a pay day for me and my lawyer. Not that I seek a pay day for police malfeasance. I seek to not be victimized by police malfeasance. I think you'll find that while SOME states may give the police the authority to separate a legal firearm holder from their weapon on a whim, Indiana does not. If an officer wishes to separate HIMSELF from MY weapon, I will not "detain" him. He is "free to go" whenever he wants to.
 
CathyInBlue:307078 said:
And when the cruiser cam audio and video of my demanding RAS is admitted in court, it'll be a pay day for me and my lawyer. Not that I seek a pay day for police malfeasance. I seek to not be victimized by police malfeasance. I think you'll find that while SOME states may give the police the authority to separate a legal firearm holder from their weapon on a whim, Indiana does not. If an officer wishes to separate HIMSELF from MY weapon, I will not "detain" him. He is "free to go" whenever he wants to.

Keep up the good work Cathy. This one way respect is bull****. If they can't trust me with a firearm, I can't trust them with one. The officer deserves only as much safety as I do. Glad you are keeping it real in Indiana.
 
And when the cruiser cam audio and video of my demanding RAS is admitted in court, it'll be a pay day for me and my lawyer. Not that I seek a pay day for police malfeasance. I seek to not be victimized by police malfeasance. I think you'll find that while SOME states may give the police the authority to separate a legal firearm holder from their weapon on a whim, Indiana does not. If an officer wishes to separate HIMSELF from MY weapon, I will not "detain" him. He is "free to go" whenever he wants to.

Feel free to cite the statute giving you the right to refuse to turn your weapon over to the police upon demand.

Upon further review it does appear that Indiana does not have a law on the books authorizing an officer to disarm a permit holder during a traffic stop.

Given Cathy's track record I am amazed but she appears to be right this time.
 
And when the cruiser cam audio and video of my demanding RAS is admitted in court, it'll be a pay day for me and my lawyer. Not that I seek a pay day for police malfeasance. I seek to not be victimized by police malfeasance. I think you'll find that while SOME states may give the police the authority to separate a legal firearm holder from their weapon on a whim, Indiana does not. If an officer wishes to separate HIMSELF from MY weapon, I will not "detain" him. He is "free to go" whenever he wants to.

If you are stopped for suspicion of committing an infraction, vehicle offense or other violation and the officer deems sufficient evidence to issue a summons, you are technically under arrest. No further RAS needed to separate you from your weapon. In NY, a V&T Code violation is an arrest-able offense with the maximum penalty being 15 days in jail or a fine not exceeding $1000 or both. Is an arrest reason for a search of your person for weapons? Absolutely. Don't mistake a summary offense or ROR with a promise to appear ticket as having the right to keep your gun on you through the incident in any state. Furthermore, Indiana Troopers (as well as Ohio and NC predominantly) have been known to arrest out of state drivers for speeding and make them either attend a hearing immediately or post bail to be freed which tells me that a ticket is an arrest as well. Think your gun wouldn't be taken, or couldn't be on a simple traffic stop? Try it. You wouldn't get a payday I assure you.
 
WTF are you talking about? My track record?

Let's start with this

Originally Posted by CathyInBlue
As has been said, Black Talons were never banned, just sales restricted by the manufacturer. Do they even manufacture "Black Talons" by name anymore? And as has also been stated, Black Talons and teflon coated ammo are two completely different things. Teflon coated ammo is banned, for the reason that it can neutralize the defensive capabilities of soft kevlar body armour by pushing the fibers out of the way, rather than getting caught in the weave and stopped. For this reason, only FMJ teflon coated bullets are actually effective at defeating soft kevlar, as even a teflon coated JHP would still find enough fibers snagged on its blunt nose to stop it. And, of course, no teflon coated bullet, FMJ or otherwise is going to defeat a hard kevlar trauma plate by virtue of its teflon coating.

"Cop killer" ammo is a term like "assault weapon", a fabrication by the Liberal MSM hype machine. Both Black Talons and teflon coated bullets have been tarred and feathered with the "cop killer" smear, even though no Black Talon has ever been used against a police officer of which I am aware.

As for the contention that a bullet is a "cop killer" if it has the capability of defeating soft kevlar body armour of the type used by law enforcement, as so many Liberal lawmakers attempt to stipulate in one or another of their heinously badly written bills from time to time, that would effectively ban all rifle hunting within the jurisdiction, as any proper .223 or .308 deer rifle packs enough kenetic energy at the tip of a FMJ to eat through soft kevlar like a hot knife through butter. Soft kevlar is meant to stop handgun rounds, not rifle rounds. The terminal ballistics are vastly different.
but such nuances of objective reality are lost on people who go about with "cop killer bullets" on their lips.


Where to begin?

Black Talons were never banned, just sales restricted by the manufacturer.

False Winchester stopped making the Black Talons period because of the publicity issues. They were never restricted for sale to cops only you are think about KTWs which leads us to item number two,

In 1993 Winchester removed the ammunition from public sale,[12] and eventually law enforcement began using the re-branded Ranger SXT line of the same basic design, but at no time was Black Talon ammunition illegal to possess.
Rread more here Black Talon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Teflon coated ammo is banned, for the reason that it can neutralize the defensive capabilities of soft kevlar body armour by pushing the fibers out of the way, rather than getting caught in the weave and stopped.

False
KTWs are a restricted item by the manufacturer who has never offered them for sale to anyone but law enforcement.


In the mid 1960's, Dr. Paul Kopsch (an Ohio coroner), Daniel Turcos (a police sergeant) and Donald Ward (Dr. Kopsch's special investigator) began experimenting with special purpose handgun ammunition. Their objective was to develop a law enforcement round capable of improved penetration against hard targets like windshield glass and automobile doors. Conventional bullets, made primarily from lead, are often ineffective against hard targets especially when fired at handgun velocities. In the 1970's, Kopsch, Turcos and Ward produced their "KTW" handgun ammunition using steel cored bullets capable of great penetration. Following further experimentation, in 1981 they began producing bullets constructed primarily of brass. The hard brass bullets caused exceptional wear on handgun barrels, a problem combated by coating the bullets with Teflon. The Teflon coating did nothing to improve penetration, it simply reduced damage to the gun barrel.

Despite the facts that "KTW" ammunition had never been available to the general public and that no police officer has ever been killed by a handgun bullet penetrating their body armor, the media incorrectly reported that the Teflon coated bullets were designed to defeat the body armor that law enforcement officers were beginning to use. The myth of "Cop-killer" bullets was born.
Read more here
GunCite-Gun Control: "Cop-killer" Bullets

Gawd I love internet gun myths Share
http://www.usacarry.com/forums/deadly-force-law/21639-black-talons-3.html

That's three times in one post
 
Keep up the good work Cathy. This one way respect is bull****. If they can't trust me with a firearm, I can't trust them with one. The officer deserves only as much safety as I do. Glad you are keeping it real in Indiana.

Your comment demonstrates a clear line between a fictional mindset of what you perceive your rights to be and what reality and laws really exist in today's society. Keeping it real? Your notion of 'keeping it real' further demonstrates your apparent lack of knowledge in LE operations. A cop wouldn't know you from a hole in the ground so sputtering some frivolous attitude towards them while they are performing their duties is incredibly ill advised for any one. The big picture here is that the op got his gun back...no problem....all in a matter of minutes. This thread has become another soap box for cop bashing and taking an otherwise simple traffic stop into the context of rights violations.
 
I appreciate both sides here. When you look at the (IMO) abuses that occured after Katrina and the disarming of honest citizens, I don't think it is wrong to raise awareness to the potential abuses of unquestioned disarming of citizens. If we the people don't complain, what is to say the police powers won't increase while our rights are diminished until it is generally felt that there just is no need to ever have an armed citizen? That would certtainly end any debate here, after all. In Nevada, I do not even have to tell the stopping officer if I am armed. This law oscelates time to tima and as of now, this is the law. That said, when my plate is run the officer will know I am a CCW. I've decided to let them know and let the officer decide how to handle it. Since getting my permit though, I haven't had a true stop, interestingly enough.

An intersting stop occured a while ago on some dirt roads near an old mine. I had an un-cased AR, unloaded but with a magazine in and several other unconcealed weapons; stuck my hands out of the window, & immediately let him know I had just been shooting with friends & I had a ***** load of guns on me. Long story short, he got me out of the car & explained he stopped me cause nearby B&E's had been occuring and he saw camoflauge and thought I might be his guy. Personally, I highly doubt the mines nearby had all that many B&E's. At some point my phone in the car began ringing. The officer said I could answer it...thinking of the exposed AR I told him I would let it go to voice mail. I thought it pretty cool/ballsy for the officer to not mind me going into a vehicle that instantly left him out gunned.

I apprecciate the need for officer safety, but also know there are abuses of power. To that end, what sections of the constitution seperate the powers of a police officer, and me? I do believe that we have moved away from the founders intentions in this regard, I have found myself the victim of crime and subject to a SWAT team sarrounding my family because I was (again) wearing camo & playing in a field behind my house with brightly colored guns with my 9 yo son. Nothing like seeing several officers with thier guns aimed at your wife & kid all because you were being suspicious. Only in this day & age is a father playing with his son suspicious, but not to digress.... I fear we are moving to a state where only two classes have rights: LEO's & Criminals. Is there a way to prevent this & still provide officer safety? I feel it lies somewhere in the shift back to the beat cop where possible and away from the ultra military SWAT Cop. Just my opinion.
 
It seems like a good way to get shot too though. Most NV cops seem reluctant to wait & see what your intent is. In a state where private citizens can shoot you over stealing gas...
 
Keep up the good work Cathy. This one way respect is bull****. If they can't trust me with a firearm, I can't trust them with one. The officer deserves only as much safety as I do. Glad you are keeping it real in Indiana.

Your comment demonstrates a clear line between a fictional mindset of what you perceive your rights to be and what reality and laws really exist in today's society.

Please do explain how you correlated one way respect, one way trust, and one way safety with our rights? I don't even recall using the word "rights" a single time in my post.

You post clearly shows a lack of comprehension skills and a vast imagination. And the fact you got caught up in trying to push rights under the bus, when they weren't even brought up to begin with, is sickening. No wonder our constitution is becoming worthless.


Keeping it real? Your notion of 'keeping it real' further demonstrates your apparent lack of knowledge in LE operations. A cop wouldn't know you from a hole in the ground so sputtering some frivolous attitude towards them while they are performing their duties is incredibly ill advised for any one.

A cop doesn't know me from a hole in the ground, and I do not know the cop from a hole in the ground either...and? I must respect the Leo but I don't deserve respect back? Thanks for proving my point, one way respect is ********.

Lay off the polish for a while, the effects from the fumes are showing.


The big picture here is that the op got his gun back...no problem....all in a matter of minutes. This thread has become another soap box for cop bashing and taking an otherwise simple traffic stop into the context of rights violations.

Those pesky rights, always getting in the way...

Oh and btw, Leo's do not have the authority to disarm civilians in Indiana. Treo all ready pointed that out. So, when you attempt to tell others what LE operations are, it would be nice if you actually knew them.
 
It seems like a good way to get shot too though. Most NV cops seem reluctant to wait & see what your intent is. In a state where private citizens can shoot you over stealing gas...

There are easier ways. Retrieve your wallet before you pull over. I have always done that, and had my driver's license in hand before stopping, carrying a gun or not. If you keep a gun in the glovebox, then move the insurance and registration to an envelope clipped to sun visor.

Problem solved, now you don't have to reach near the gun, in the officer's presence, to retrieve the documents that you are required by law to produce.
 
When you look at the (IMO) abuses that occurred after Katrina and the disarming of honest citizens, I don't think it is wrong to raise awareness to the potential abuses of unquestioned disarming of citizens. If we the people don't complain, what is to say the police powers won't increase while our rights are diminished.

I appreciate the need for officer safety, but also know there are abuses of power. To that end, what sections of the constitution separate the powers of a police officer, and me?


Katrina was a small test bed or perfect opportunity to try and see how gun confiscation would be handled and what the outcome could be at a higher level. Let that be an example of what not to do. If the SHTF and military and militarized police show up either keep your mouth shut about firearm ownership, leave before they come or kill them when they try to take your weapon/s. At some point we are all going to have to grow a set if we want this country to continue as a Republic for which it once stood.

Btw, police powers have increased and our rights have diminished. I believe this happens in all societies that are about to collapse.

"what sections of the constitution separate the powers of a police officer, and me?" the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th amendment
 
""what sections of the constitution separate the powers of a police officer, and me?" the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th amendment " Exactly, there is nothing that says an officer of the law has any powers beyond these, either, if I understand the document correctly.

I am very situational. I pull my wallet early as well. Everyone I know says to do the opposite, but I find they like it when they see you holding these obvious object in their car lights. I am also going to take in mind the demeaner of the officer. Always willing to assert my rights, but my family needs me and I am not going to needlessly push it during a traffic stop. I've been under swat guns 3 times. (I really am a law abiding citizen, I am just that lucky guy you hear about that attracks trouble.Family trait.) In certain situations you have to decide if your willing to die and be used as part of an anti gun rights campaign. I think of the CCW needlessly gunned down at the Cost CO (i believe it was) down in Vegas, and I don't want that to be me. Out here, there is a definate influence of the old west and the gangsters that founded our Biggest Little cities.

And thank you for your service Navy. Im a Navy brat to a 30 Year 'Nam Vet and would have joined myself if I hadn't broken my back. One of the most fun moments in my life was tellling the recuiter who my dad is after he was telling me how I was gonna be a seal or a spy in Russia. He was like "crap - well you know the deal." :) To help understand the anomoly that is 'Hruz' - my ol man retired an E6. He made the rank twice. As far as I know on paper that should be impossible.
 
There are easier ways. Retrieve your wallet before you pull over. I have always done that, and had my driver's license in hand before stopping, carrying a gun or not. If you keep a gun in the glovebox, then move the insurance and registration to an envelope clipped to sun visor.

Problem solved, now you don't have to reach near the gun, in the officer's presence, to retrieve the documents that you are required by law to produce.

All very good advise. I have only had two quick stops since being a CCW - totalling about 30 seconds total so I haven't had the chance to confess being armed.

What would you do if you are directly asked: Are you armed? In NV I do no need to reveal. What then if you are pulled from the vehicle for a search? My thought is on a human level you look like a jerk if you say no to a direct question then they find my big ol' auto on my side.Just curious how you would handle these situations. Another CCW I know & trust is retired Reno PD so he is all about the cops comfort! lol!
 
All very good advise. I have only had two quick stops since being a CCW - totalling about 30 seconds total so I haven't had the chance to confess being armed.

What would you do if you are directly asked: Are you armed? In NV I do no need to reveal. What then if you are pulled from the vehicle for a search? My thought is on a human level you look like a jerk if you say no to a direct question then they find my big ol' auto on my side.Just curious how you would handle these situations. Another CCW I know & trust is retired Reno PD so he is all about the cops comfort! lol!

1. If asked, I will answer truthfully only the question asked. "Any weapons in the vehicle?" Answer: "Yes, sir, there are."

2. Stopped for speeding while looking for a city park in a town I had never been to before. Had the left hand out the window with driver's license and military ID card (required to validate the out of state driver's license) and right hand on steering wheel as the officer approached. Folder containing insurance and registration on my lap. Taurus PT-145 openly carried in a holster on my belt. Never said a word about my CPL or gun to the officer. Took insurance and registration out of the folder on my lap and gave to officer. Officer goes to his car and returns after a couple minutes. Asks me to step out of the vehicle. He walks back to between his car and mine.

I exit the vehicle, openly carrying my Taurus PT-145 Stainless in a holster on my belt. Could not legally leave it in the vehicle with my family because nobody else had a CPL. Walk back to meet the officer between our vehicles. He says he didn't want to lecture me in front of my family, but I needed to slow down. Gave me back all my documents, no ticket. I wished him a good day, he did the same to me, and that was it. No reaction at all to the gun plainly visible in a holster on my belt.

Now, if an officer was ever going to frisk me without asking me first about weapons, I would tell them about the gun that they would be feeling during the frisk.
 
Thanks for your perspective. Sounds like we are of like mind for the most part. I do wonder if they would treat a civilian differently, but I woud probably initiate things the same way. When my family was assaulted by a tweeker with a knife, we called 911 and told them I was holding him at bay with my revolver. I was disarmed then by police, but I think that should be expected. The awesome part was the look on his friends faces when they handed the gun back to me.
 
Your comment demonstrates a clear line between a fictional mindset of what you perceive your rights to be and what reality and laws really exist in today's society. Keeping it real? Your notion of 'keeping it real' further demonstrates your apparent lack of knowledge in LE operations. A cop wouldn't know you from a hole in the ground so sputtering some frivolous attitude towards them while they are performing their duties is incredibly ill advised for any one. The big picture here is that the op got his gun back...no problem....all in a matter of minutes. This thread has become another soap box for cop bashing and taking an otherwise simple traffic stop into the context of rights violations.
  1. I don't know the cop from a "hole in the ground". He could be a drooling degenerate like Daniel Harless.
  2. If you don't believe in rights at all, then I suppose there can be no "rights violations".
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,531
Messages
610,692
Members
75,032
Latest member
BLACKROCK6
Back
Top