Here's why I won't say a word that's none of their business: Police Brutality, Police Corruption,Police Officer Videos, Police News
Decision to make if an officer pulls you over for a routine traffic violaiton
- Thread starter dmiladin
- Start date
Blogengeezer
New member
Son was pulled over for high speed in city. County NM officer took license back to patrol car for data check. Upon return, asked if the weapon was with my son? Son replied no, he was working on the customer car (WRX) after major suspension repairs, and testing it (handed his business card to officer). Explained, "only at times, not officially working", he 'carry's. Officer handed back DL and said, "nice car", have a nice day.
Blogengeezer
New member
Situations vary..NM: Veteran State Police Officer gunned down during traffic stop in 1970's. Intense Roadblocks immediately surrounded ABQ. Upon approaching I-25 roadblock, manned by heavily armed officers, including Mounted Patrol auxiliaries, I openly layed .357 in plain view on truck dash. Surrounded by officers with weapons all leveled at me, they blinded with bright lights and looked inside vehicle. Said that with my weapon openly displayed on dash, they "figured the bad guys were Not in my camper, but open the back anyway". Officers took aggressive stance as I unlocked the back door for search. 30-30 and ammo were in camper. Upon 'Clear' of any suspicion, Officer told me, "Have a nice night, be careful" and waved me through. The Officer's killers hijacked an airliner to CUBA the next day. They Never returned to USA.
Wow. Do they offer such a response if Joe Citizen is gunned down in cold blood? And does the fact that a police officer was shot really justify illegal detainments and warrantless searches of Joe Citizens who have exhibited no suspicious behavior?
B2Tall
Stirrer of the Pot
I've done a 180 on this one. I was always of the mind that I'd alert the LEO to the fact that I was armed, but after speaking to numerous LEOs on the subject I've changed my mind. The story was pretty much the same - sure, the LEO would appreciate it but it's not worth the trouble if you're stopped by a skittish cop, rookie, etc. None of the cops said they'd be angry if the person didn't volunteer that they were legally carrying.
I won't bring the subject up.
I won't bring the subject up.
Shortly after 9-11-01, I drove wife to regional airport for departure flight to visit relatives.
National Guard had set up checkpoint on entry to airport stopping all traffic and asking to open trunk. I refused to comply under 4th ammendment. Was motioned to side lane and another supervisors car arrived. He asked if I was aware of what had happened a few days earlier, I replied that I was,but that the 4th ammendment was not suspended due to that incident. I was refused to allow to drive any closer to the terminal, so removed wife's bag from trunk, out of sight of officers observation. She walked remaining 150 yards to terminal. Officers radioed ahead as to the situation and her bags were hand searched prior to her being allowed to board.
National Guard had set up checkpoint on entry to airport stopping all traffic and asking to open trunk. I refused to comply under 4th ammendment. Was motioned to side lane and another supervisors car arrived. He asked if I was aware of what had happened a few days earlier, I replied that I was,but that the 4th ammendment was not suspended due to that incident. I was refused to allow to drive any closer to the terminal, so removed wife's bag from trunk, out of sight of officers observation. She walked remaining 150 yards to terminal. Officers radioed ahead as to the situation and her bags were hand searched prior to her being allowed to board.
Munkeyhunter
New member
From an interview with Larken Rose: posted yesterday
We're all taught that obedience to authority and obeying the law is what makes civilization possible. We were all told that lie, but it's still a lie. The belief that some people have the right to forcibly dominate others, even in a limited way, is the opposite of being civilized. It's an attempt to legitimize theft, murder and other violent aggression, by way of pseudo-religious political rituals − constitutions, elections, legislation, and so on. In short, the belief in authority has led to more death and destruction than anything else in history…And right now, I don't know of any issue in the world that even comes close to this in importance.
The very concept of government, which hinges on the concept of authority − the idea that some people can acquire the right to forcibly control everyone else − is probably self-contradictory and logically bogus. I don't just mean it's a bad idea on a practical level. I mean it's an insane idea.
This may sound odd, but believing in government makes as much sense as believing in Santa Claus, and that is remarkably easy to prove…One example is: Can someone delegate a right he doesn't have? No,of course not. If I don't have the right to steal, I can't give someone else the right to steal. It's so elementary it's ridiculous. The problem is that obvious truth completely rules out all government. If normal people don't have the right to tax, and forcibly interfere in the lives of non-violent people, then they can't possibly have given such a right to those in government − not by any election, or constitution, or any other document or ritual − and that means that just about everything that government does is inherently illegitimate.
To call it government implies that it has authority, that it has the right to rule, that it has rights that us mere mortals don't have. Those in power claim they got these super-human rights from us, from the people, despite the fact that we never had such rights to begin with, and still have no such rights and couldn't possibly have given them to anyone else. That's just one example of how what we're taught as basic civics is absurd, insane and horribly dangerous garbage.
We're all taught that obedience to authority and obeying the law is what makes civilization possible. We were all told that lie, but it's still a lie. The belief that some people have the right to forcibly dominate others, even in a limited way, is the opposite of being civilized. It's an attempt to legitimize theft, murder and other violent aggression, by way of pseudo-religious political rituals − constitutions, elections, legislation, and so on. In short, the belief in authority has led to more death and destruction than anything else in history…And right now, I don't know of any issue in the world that even comes close to this in importance.
The very concept of government, which hinges on the concept of authority − the idea that some people can acquire the right to forcibly control everyone else − is probably self-contradictory and logically bogus. I don't just mean it's a bad idea on a practical level. I mean it's an insane idea.
This may sound odd, but believing in government makes as much sense as believing in Santa Claus, and that is remarkably easy to prove…One example is: Can someone delegate a right he doesn't have? No,of course not. If I don't have the right to steal, I can't give someone else the right to steal. It's so elementary it's ridiculous. The problem is that obvious truth completely rules out all government. If normal people don't have the right to tax, and forcibly interfere in the lives of non-violent people, then they can't possibly have given such a right to those in government − not by any election, or constitution, or any other document or ritual − and that means that just about everything that government does is inherently illegitimate.
To call it government implies that it has authority, that it has the right to rule, that it has rights that us mere mortals don't have. Those in power claim they got these super-human rights from us, from the people, despite the fact that we never had such rights to begin with, and still have no such rights and couldn't possibly have given them to anyone else. That's just one example of how what we're taught as basic civics is absurd, insane and horribly dangerous garbage.
hogdoc357
HogDoc Olliday
Not required in GA, but I will choose to inform by handing the officer my drivers license and my weapons permit. I keep them together. It lets the officer know that I am not a felon and that I have had a background check. Also, I feel most officers will appreciate my openness and will feel more at ease with me during the encounter. I just want to make my police encounters as pleasant and quick as possible. However, I reserve the right to do a 180 on this position if I have a negative encounter in the future.
Deanimator
New member
Ohio has mandatory notification. Cops have abused the law and we're working to get mandatory notification eliminated.
Were it not required, I would NEVER notify. It's none of the cop's business. If he doesn't assume that everybody COULD be armed, he's too dumb for the job.
Were it not required, I would NEVER notify. It's none of the cop's business. If he doesn't assume that everybody COULD be armed, he's too dumb for the job.
arkie45
New member
Same in Arkansas
maine04619
New member
While not required I hand my permit to the officer with my license. Though I have only been pulled over twice.
SGB
New member
Sorry, but that's not true.
SGB
New member
SGB
New member
Yes it does ....... you must produce your LICENSE and IDENTIFICATION when a LEO asks for your License and ID. No where does it say that you must disclose your armed as you claimed, but then I forgot that you know it all **and what you don't know you'll make up.**
[SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]
eagleeyes
New member
if you're not carrying at the time you don't have to show a license but if you are and the officer asks you still must tell where the gun is and show the license .....again if an officer is conducting a traffic stop on me and asks if i'm carrying and if i am i will produce my card and tell where my gun is located if asked
but if you choose not to so be it that is none of my concern
