Hey r4fthrs: Your comments about the Indiana LEO who did not even ask to see your CCW is probably the 99.9% reaction from LEOs. I'm sure there are some "very strange" LEOs out there who do not belong in LE but, from some of the posts on this thread, you would think it is rampant. I know in SC you are required to show CCWP IF you are CC, but it just makes sense to me to show my CCWP along with my driver's license---I guess to each his own. Bottom line---obey traffic laws and you won't get stopped in the first place. In over 50 years of driving I can recall 3 cases of being stopped, so odds are that I will never be in a position to worry about this situation.
Inform the officer or not when concealed carry?
- Thread starter Pele
- Start date
jrice862
New member
Handling the situation in this manner is clearly setting up an adversarial situation. You are setting yourself up to get pulled out of the car and to get any potential ticket they might have stopped you for in the first place. "Yes, sir. No, sir" is the only way to go to avoid s**t from the officer and his/her partner. No one, especially LEO, likes a wiseguy. :no:
Here in NC, "license checks" (actually sobriety checks) are common. Both the State Troopers and the County Deputies do them regularly.
I haven't been stopped for a traffic violation in over 20 years, but I get stopped at license checks about once month.
bill
Hey jrice862: Your reply to joelevi was right on. For heavens sake if you are an LEO and stop a car at night and get a pile of legalese gobblygook from a smarta__, you are going to be VERY suspicious and are going to deal with this motorist in an extemely aggressive and suspicious manner that only makes things worse for the driver. I hate to do this on this forum in somewhat denigrating a fellow forum member, but his comments make me think that either he is one of those posters who like to "tongue in cheek/pull our leg" with exaggerated ridiculous comments or, since he is from MA, the home of Kerry and Kennedy, he can't help himself. PS: Hey joelevi--I apologize now if I have insulted you in a manner that has you upset with my comments.
utimmer43
New member
Over the course of these 200+ posts, it is no secret that my preference is to NOT inform, at least in the beginning of the stop. But I'll agree with the others that your suggestion here is downright foolish. You end your post with "don't volunteer information." But isn't that exactly what you are doing by handing over your permit? If you are going to hand him your permit, then be prepared and willing to tell him if you are carrying, and where it is. Otherwise, keep your permit in your pocket. Don't send mixed messages. Don't try to lure the LEO into some sort of civil rights trap. Basically, don't be an asshole.
Daugherty16
New member
Ultimmer makes a very good point
It does seem pretty inconsistent to give up the CCW, then play smart aleck when the obvious next question is asked. If you're trying to get the stop off to a good start, you just shot yourself in the foot (pun intended).
In my opinion, (which is given freely and therefore worth every penny) there shouldn't be any question who is in charge of the traffic stop. Obviously, it is the LEO. I think providing the CCW, and advising the officer where my gun is located when he/she asks and asking them how they want tpo proceed (don't use the word gun - weapon, sidearm, or "it" are all better - see the prior post regarding Massad Ayoob's advice re: rookie cops hearing the word gun), is sensible and logical. It tells the LEO that you are law-abiding, cooperative, that you are letting them control the encounter, and that you are not a threat to them. Since i carry a pistol nearly all the time, this is just my solution to avoiding all the negatives that could develop if the officer sees my pistol accidentally (very bad, unless you like the taste of asphalt or lead), or (bad, but not as bad) runs my DL and learns about the CCW i didn't mention to them.
No, in CT advising the officer is not required. No, they really don't "need" to know. No, i am no threat to them. However, i also realize how nasty their job can be; nearly everyone has read of a LEO being shot and killed during a traffic stop. Every time they approach a car, the question is running somewhere in their mind - is this the guy who's going to blow me away? - so i feel that advising can help take the edge off that. From a practical perspective, it may save me a ticket or maybe not. But from a logical perspective, and from posts made by current and former LEOs, it is reasonable to expect that a potential cop-killer will conceal and not advise, where a law-abiding citizen who advises is likely not a cop-killer. If you can remove that concern from the LEO's head up front, why not do so?
That's my .02. Others raise good points about staying concealed, which i respect. I just don't happen to agree with them.
It does seem pretty inconsistent to give up the CCW, then play smart aleck when the obvious next question is asked. If you're trying to get the stop off to a good start, you just shot yourself in the foot (pun intended).
In my opinion, (which is given freely and therefore worth every penny) there shouldn't be any question who is in charge of the traffic stop. Obviously, it is the LEO. I think providing the CCW, and advising the officer where my gun is located when he/she asks and asking them how they want tpo proceed (don't use the word gun - weapon, sidearm, or "it" are all better - see the prior post regarding Massad Ayoob's advice re: rookie cops hearing the word gun), is sensible and logical. It tells the LEO that you are law-abiding, cooperative, that you are letting them control the encounter, and that you are not a threat to them. Since i carry a pistol nearly all the time, this is just my solution to avoiding all the negatives that could develop if the officer sees my pistol accidentally (very bad, unless you like the taste of asphalt or lead), or (bad, but not as bad) runs my DL and learns about the CCW i didn't mention to them.
No, in CT advising the officer is not required. No, they really don't "need" to know. No, i am no threat to them. However, i also realize how nasty their job can be; nearly everyone has read of a LEO being shot and killed during a traffic stop. Every time they approach a car, the question is running somewhere in their mind - is this the guy who's going to blow me away? - so i feel that advising can help take the edge off that. From a practical perspective, it may save me a ticket or maybe not. But from a logical perspective, and from posts made by current and former LEOs, it is reasonable to expect that a potential cop-killer will conceal and not advise, where a law-abiding citizen who advises is likely not a cop-killer. If you can remove that concern from the LEO's head up front, why not do so?
That's my .02. Others raise good points about staying concealed, which i respect. I just don't happen to agree with them.
torontogunguy
New member
More and more states are passing laws that DO permit random stopping of vehicles to check for alcohol consumption, our #1 killer on the roads. And having said that, I have to agree with you that in some 40 years of driving I can only recall being stopped perhaps 2 or 3 times for sobriety inspection and once when they appeared to be looking for someone. Still, when stopped for any reason it is my policy to hand over my driver's license, registration and insurance AND my CCW permit if I have a firearm in the car. At the border (I cross back and forth into Canada regularly) I always present my passport and firearms papers up front (the declaration is required by law in both directions) and have never been inspected to date. The most they have asked is "where?" and I tell them in a safe in the back of the van ($49 Harbour Freight). Once, mind you, they did look to see if I really did have a safe but never asked me to open it.
Be safe.
SirCharlie
Chuck
I am from Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
I was taught that you must inform the officer as soon as you are approached.
I don't know of any reason why I would want to break the law and risk losing it.
They probably know you carry before they approach your car.
Chuck
I was taught that you must inform the officer as soon as you are approached.
I don't know of any reason why I would want to break the law and risk losing it.
They probably know you carry before they approach your car.
Chuck
joelevi made a few good points. Giving the government something that you are not required to do will only diminish ones constitutional rights in the long run.
"Today the primary threat to the liberties of the American people comes not from communism, foreign tyrants or dictators. It comes from the tendency on our own shores to centralize power, to trust bureaucracies rather than people."
–George H. Allen
"Today the primary threat to the liberties of the American people comes not from communism, foreign tyrants or dictators. It comes from the tendency on our own shores to centralize power, to trust bureaucracies rather than people."
–George H. Allen
utimmer43
New member
Many of which I agree with and have repeatedly made myself, as have others. He hasn't suggested anything new other than handing over your permit and then not being completely forthright, which is completely asinine.
Hey osmosis: Your comment about joelevi making some good comments should have been prefaced with "very few". I still believe that this post was a "red herring". Can anyone with an ounce of common sense tell me that when it is dark and you are stopped by an LEO on a lonely road, and he does not know you, and you then give him your CCWP, and you then start talking up a lot of mysterious conspiracy/legal theory, that you expect him to be downright courteous and friendly and give you the benefit of the doubt and not be suspicious? This scenario defies logic; an LEO likes to go home at night and not recognizing a distorted picture with strange utterances from a motorist, does not help him get home. As everyone has posted on this thread, you either present your CCWP or not--end of story---live with the consequences--if you live in a state where mandatory presentation (whether you have the CCW on you or not) is necessary, so be it--it is your obligation. If it is not necessary, then do whatever you want-- BUT--when you are stopped by an LEO for any reason, respect and utmost attention to his commands are called for---not argumentative, suspicious discussion--that's crazy and if an LEO does not respond firmly to that kind of talk, he is a bit crazy and foolhardy, as well.
kengrubb
New member
In a state where the law says you must notify, well duh, you notify that you're carrying. Settled? Good? All agreed? Aye! The Ayes have it. Motion carries.
In a state where one is NOT required to notify an officer that one is carrying, as is the case here in Washington state, I don't volunteer the fact that I'm carrying but I also won't deny it or lie in response to a direct question.
If it's a routine traffic stop, no, I'm very likely not going to volunteer that I'm carrying. However, if I'm asked to step out of the vehicle, for any reason, or if the officer does anything else which might indicate he's about to find out I'm carrying a firearm, then yes I'm going to say, "Officer, I have a license to carry, and I do have it on me." Cops don't like surprises.
I'm also not going to lie if I'm asked a direct question, such as "Do you have any drugs or weapons in the car?" Mas Ayoob related an incident where he and his daughter were driving near the Texas-Mexico border and happened upon a Customs Checkpoint. The officer was asking every vehicle stopped do you have any drugs or guns in the car. When the officer came up to Mas, he responded "Prescription drugs, personal firearms". I think this is without a doubt the best possible response one can offer to this question.
Once I was stopped for failure to signal. The officer was stopping everyone for every infraction imaginable as there had been a series of crashes at that intersection recently. Wasn't writing tickets just glancing at ID and giving a verbal warning to be more careful. He asked whether I had any bombs, bazookas, hand grenades, or flamethrowers in the car. I couldn't resist chuckling as I answered "No, I did not". Still didn't volunteer I was carrying.
In a state where one is NOT required to notify an officer that one is carrying, as is the case here in Washington state, I don't volunteer the fact that I'm carrying but I also won't deny it or lie in response to a direct question.
If it's a routine traffic stop, no, I'm very likely not going to volunteer that I'm carrying. However, if I'm asked to step out of the vehicle, for any reason, or if the officer does anything else which might indicate he's about to find out I'm carrying a firearm, then yes I'm going to say, "Officer, I have a license to carry, and I do have it on me." Cops don't like surprises.
I'm also not going to lie if I'm asked a direct question, such as "Do you have any drugs or weapons in the car?" Mas Ayoob related an incident where he and his daughter were driving near the Texas-Mexico border and happened upon a Customs Checkpoint. The officer was asking every vehicle stopped do you have any drugs or guns in the car. When the officer came up to Mas, he responded "Prescription drugs, personal firearms". I think this is without a doubt the best possible response one can offer to this question.
Once I was stopped for failure to signal. The officer was stopping everyone for every infraction imaginable as there had been a series of crashes at that intersection recently. Wasn't writing tickets just glancing at ID and giving a verbal warning to be more careful. He asked whether I had any bombs, bazookas, hand grenades, or flamethrowers in the car. I couldn't resist chuckling as I answered "No, I did not". Still didn't volunteer I was carrying.
hey kengrubb: Common sense should be the rule, not smartass joelevi comebacks and scholastic rhetoric. I still feel that giving an LEO my drivers license, car registration and insurance certificate and watching him go back to the car to check also provides him with possible information on things other than my driving/registration record--like a CCWP. I would rather be 100%+ cooperative and provide the CCWP along with the license than leave any room for suspicion. To each his own and each state may have a little different "twist" on the information that an LEO can get during a stop--but cooperation, cordiality, and full honesty sure help you in the long run.
Ektarr
Dedicated Infidel
While I haven't read EVERY post in this thread, I've read enough to have a question occur to me. Has it occurred to you that the requirement to disclose your CCW status places you in a subordinate position to the criminal at large? A criminal who doesn't disclose that he's got a gun if stopped for a simple traffic stop is merely exercising his Rights under the 5th Amendment...which is an option not available to us straight-arrow types. Also, could the ability to peer into your situation (by an LEO) and see that you have a CCW Permit be construed as "unnecessary search" without probable cause?
Just playing Devil's advocate here... Whaddaya think?
Just playing Devil's advocate here... Whaddaya think?
kengrubb
New member
kelcarry, what smartass comebacks did I present or share? Please be specific rather than general.
It's good that you feel this way, particularly given that SC is a must notify state.
kengrubb
New member
If said criminal is found in possession of a firearm, with or without a license to carry, as a convicted felon then it's another federal felony. A straight-arrow with a license to carry who doesn't notify might, depending upon the state in question, escape with only a misdemeanor or a fine. Exercising your 5A rights doesn't mean you can't still get convicted.
Same could be said of the requirement to have a driver's license, proof of insurance, and vehicle registration.
Ektarr
Dedicated Infidel
I didn't say he was 'found' to be carrying...I said what if he's stopped for a minor traffic violation, for example. He can't eventually be found guilty of failing to inform the officer he was carrying because that would violate his 5th Amendment Rights.
Some may pick at this, but the fact is that driving, and it's attendant requirements, isn't a Constitutionally protected Right, but a privilege controlled by the State . . . unlike Keep & Bear.
In NC, your CC permit is linked to both your car ragistrations, and your driver's license. So since it is customary for the LEO to run your license plate # before he approaches you, he already know you have a CC permit.
During "license checks" (sobriety checks) that information will not normally be available to the LEO, unless there is some irregularity that prompts him to run your DL and or plate#.
But I'm in the camp that pull my permit and my license out together, even if I'm not carrying. We are required to show the permit IF we are carrying.
The back of my permit says "IT IS UNLAWFUL TO CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN WITHOUT THIS PERMIT AND VALID IDENTIFICATION IN YOUR POSSESSION OR TO FAIL TO DISCLOSE TO ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER THAT YOU ARE A CARRYING A CONCEALED HANDGUN."
ymmv
hey kengrubb: I'm sorry if you misunderstood my "smartass comment". It was prefaced by "joelevi's" and it was meant as HIS comments not yours . As you said in previous posts some of his comments were legit but I just found the rest of it to be a bit of having fun at the expense of the rest of us who take this seriously. Sorry for the confusion and I apologize if I gave you reason to post the way you did. As billwot posted, I guess states are becoming more "computerized"--it seems an easy stretch to think that they can come up with your CCWP when they look up your license and registration.
New Threads
-
Recent TX Appeals Court declaration that ATF arm brace rule is unconstitutional
- Started by lw07
- Replies: 1
-
Hunter Constantine or Phlster Enigma, for running?
- Started by sigsag1
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
Members online
No members online now.