Law Enforcement Officers And Concealed Carry.

Why does this thread keep disappearing?

By the way Blue, if you think this country is as tyrannical as you say, you don't have to stay here. But I would be curious as to where you would go, and take your guns, and carry them. Personally, I served in the armed forces so you have the rights you enjoy. This is a great country and I am proud to wave the flag in my front yard and support the local police.

I was in the Army too, only I don't pretend that my time in gives me any special consideration when discussing my rights, nor would I use it as a cudgel to lend credibility to my suggestion that people with whom I disagree should simply leave the country rather than discuss their differences with me as equals. Being a mindless flag-waver gets you no increased credibility either.

You obviously didn't serve so that I have the rights I enjoy, because my right to express my beliefs and observations concerning the deteriorating state of individual liberty in this country is among the most-important-to-me rights that I enjoy. You served for your own purposes just like I did, and nobody owes you or me a single iota of special consideration for it in the way the course of normal conversation goes. It is disgusting that you would raise that canard as though you're something more special than those of us who disagree with you because of your indifference to the burgeoning police state that you're apparently completely ignorant of. Those cops at the range or your fibbie buddy can go off the rails anytime they either lose control or it just suits their fancy for whatever (illegitimate) reason, and there ain't a damned thing a law-abiding citizen can do about it. There are also myriad videos documenting how much abuse and indignity one must suffer just to file a complaint against an abusive cop at their department, which, in case you're ignorance extends that far, is the only place one can initiate a complaint against a cop. They're protected, insulated and supported by their departments even when complainants enter the building to file complaints with visible injuries inflicted by the same cops the command is protecting!

And the thing that is most disgusting about people who claim to be Second Amendment supporters and advocates, but support cops no matter what, is that the Second Amendment was written to acknowledge the natural, fundamental individual right of all people to defend themselves against abusive government, and that includes government's enforcers - cops. So don't give me all this BS about giving them lip or having a bad attitude because someone resists having their rights violated, in many cases, by the mere fact of being stopped and forced into questioning at a DUI checkpoint or other rights-violating forms of involuntary contact with cops. It not only doesn't ring true with anybody paying even a modicum of attention to what's going on in this country, it rings ignorant as all get-out.

All anyone who thinks a cop can ever be a fully trustworthy good friend has to do to disabuse themselves of that delusion is read the link in my sig-line. The kind of epiphany detailed in that link goes on all across this country on a daily basis, because no matter how friendly they may be under relaxed off-the-job circumstances with you, you will be fortunate if you only witness someone else becoming one of their victims like I did, rather than feeling their wrath for nothing more significant than speeding or being contemptuous of the cop not listening to a legitimate reason for the speeding, or lending a helping hand because of the legitimacy of that reason. To hear people with your viewpoint tell it, that cop was just doing his job, and I find such viewpoints to be utterly disgusting and despicable.

Blues
 
In states where informing is required I don't think it has been a problem. People haven't been drug out of the car and disarmed. And yes there is probably a video somewhere showing that it has happened.

One name: Daniel Harless. Much more than just a youtube video.
Link Removed

And I know most people will will say "most cops are not like that" and I would agree with them. But here is where that reasoning fails when talking about protecting oneself from the actions of police officers:

How many people do you or I walk by/interact with every day in our lives? Sometimes tens of people in a day, sometimes hundreds, maybe even thousands. How many times are we attacked by even just one of those up to thousands of people we pass by every day? So would you say, based upon that, that it is unreasonable for me to carry a gun in public in order to protect myself from criminals? I would certainly hope not. Yet how many thousands of those persons would feel much more at ease if nobody (other than the government) carried a gun in public? So should we leave our guns at home so they can feel at ease?

Now apply the same reasoning to a traffic stop. I don't know the person I am walking by on the street. I, more than likely, don't know the officer who has stopped me. If I am going to take the step of carrying a gun to protect myself against the 1 person amongst the thousands I am going to encounter in public who might choose to attack me, then why would I not take the step of protecting myself from the 1 officer among thousands of officers who might choose to endanger my life by acting the same way Daniel Harless did - or even by just taking my gun from me and needlessly handling it - by just keeping my mouth shut about my permit and my gun?

I think there is a very strong underlying reason why people like to "put the officer at ease" knowing the officer will "appreciate it" by showing their permits up front and telling the officer about their gun. I think that underlying reason is they are hoping that will increase their chances of the officer letting them off with a warning instead of giving them the ticket they deserve. Just not a trade-off that I am willing to make.
 
No, Blues, I believe that police CAN be trusted, and I do trust them to do the right thing. Your fear of authority might just verge on paranoia. Yes youtube is filled with videos of police acting out. What percentage of out of control LEOs do you think there are compared to the total? I know a lot of policemen/women and they are decent people. I believe the way a person perceives a LEO is in direct proportion to way they treat a LEO. If have chip on your shoulder and give a policeman a lot of lip and attitude your experience will be a lot different than if you approach them as a reasonable citizen.

This is what I don't get: blind trust. You carry a firearm for self defense, yet you blindly trust any LEO that approaches you. You do not personally know that LEO and you do not know what kind of a day he/she had. You purely trust that LEO, because he/she is a LEO, based on a citizen-LEO relationship concept that exists only in your imagination.

Limiting your legal interaction with law enforcement is all about protecting yourself by asserting your rights, i.e., about self defense. None of this has to do with having a "chip on a shoulder" or giving a LEO a "lot of lip and attitude". You can believe all you want that a LEO is your friend during a traffic stop, but ask any of your LEO friends how they are trained to conduct a traffic stop. Ask any of your LEO friends what they tell their family about legal interaction with law enforcement.

Be polite, follow all lawful commands and provide the minimum amount of information needed. Do not consent to any search or seizure. The side of the road is not the place to settle any arguments. That's what the courts are for.

Understand that this is not only about self defense against abusive LEOs, but also against any laws you may actually knowingly or unknowingly have broken. Imagine if Shaneen Allen would have been aware of her rights and asserted them. The duty to inform a LEO that you carry a firearm only applies to law-abiding citizens as the law breaker has his/her 5th Amendment right to not incriminate himself/herself. Shannon Allen would have received a traffic ticket and would have been on her way, instead, she was arrested on the spot and charged with a felony. [SARCASM]Thank god Ray Rice beat his wife unconscious and Shaneen Allen was able to enter the Pre Trial Intervention Program.[/SARCASM]
 
LOL! "Licks the boots of the enforcers of tyranny". What are you 16 years old living in your mothers basement? No wonder you are afraid to talk to police, with an attitude like that I would be surprised you talk to anyone but anarchists. Lighten up and join the human race.

A long-standing friendly acquaintance of mine has been a blogger for the last 10 years or so. Up until maybe the last 6 - 8 months or so, his writings have been mostly faith-based. He is a giving and generous man who has headed up many missions to the most squalid and poverty-stricken parts of India to witness to people who live so far removed from civilization that they've never even seen a Bible, much less know the first thing about it. Most of his trips have lasted 3 to 6 months at a time away from home, his family, and his ability to earn and provide for his family. Each time he has come home his blog posts turn faster from chronicling his trips and rejoicing in the souls he had a hand in saving to writing more about the deteriorating state of the republic. He's been home for the longest period since I've known him, somewhere around a whole year in one stretch, and today's post seems appropriate to share as an answer to the mocking laughter at the thought of tyranny being alive and well on America's shores.

From Sword At The Ready blog, by Invar - 3/08/2016:
[TABLE="width: 800, align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]Republic Lost

socialist-america.png


"A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it" - John Adams

The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

Well, we lost the Republic. It’s gone. And this people lie to themselves and pretend that a Republic still governs us simply because they can cast a ballot, buy food with an EBT card and have funds available to purchase beer and porn. They embrace nearly all vestiges of Socialism, Marxism and every other ill ISM that those bastard parents created and call it ‘fairness’ and ‘equality’. We are governed by an elite cadre of Oligarchs that have taken over both major political parties and orchestrated a velvet coup that most Americans to this very moment, are clueless occurred.

We’re done. The Grand Experiment was surrendered and squandered for the promise of free crap from the pockets of those we are jealous and envious of.

Government has become god.

And this people, slaves.

Willing slaves. As long as they get their handout.

The following essay from Christopher Taylor.

WHY ITS OVER

I’ve written and said in several places and times that our Republic is dead. This sounds pretty radical to people and I get looks of sad contempt and dismissal like old Christopher that opinionated jerk has gone too far, the poor dear. Its the kind of response you give old people when they say something terribly unfashionable and out of date, a sort of kindly dismissal and mockery.

So I thought I’d make my case here and let people decide.

The quote at the top is what Benjamin Franklin gave when he was asked what the revolution and constitutional convention has given the people of America. Franklin, like all of the founding fathers, knew that this experiment was fragile and prone to destruction. They knew that without constant vigilance, virtue, and vitalization, the republic was doomed.

We’ve left all that behind. When, exactly, is a matter of some debate, but for me the last desperate, slim glimmer of a hope was November 2012 when President Obama was reelected. When doesn’t really matter so much as how and why.

A VIRTUOUS PEOPLE

Over and over, the founders warned future generations and their people that unless the nation clung to certain specific principles, it would lose liberty and everything they’d fought for. Chief among these was virtue.

“We have no government armed in power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.” -John Adams

“Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.” -Patrick Henry

“Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the deigns of ambition.” -Thomas Jefferson

“A general dissolution of the principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy…. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader…. If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security.” -Samuel Adams

“Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principles”. -George Washington

In short, a nation which is not guided by strong ethical principles based upon an objective, absolute standard, will be blown about like a rudderless, anchorless ship in a storm. And a people who have no virtue will not consider the future or greater rewards and concepts, but only their immediate personal gain.

“We have forgotten that he who will not answer to the rudder will answer to the rocks” -Mortimer Adler

SHOW ME THE MONEY

“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” -Thomas Jefferson

Such a people will, as the founders warned, stop voting for what is right and good, but for what is handy and valuable to them personally and directly. As Sir Alex Fraser Tytle noted:

A democracy… can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.

To put it simply, people will start voting themselves goodies at the expense of liberty, the future, economics, and personal well being. As soon as a republic crosses that line, it ends. And we’ve crossed that line.

The problem too many people develop is a sort of blindness. They know at some level it isn’t true, but begin to convince themselves that if only the right sort of people get into office, they can fix everything, or at least slow the disaster. But the United States is a democratic republic, so that means we elect representatives by popular vote to govern in our place.

And in that kind of system, we get the people who reflect and represent the culture and people of the nation at large. Once a nation loses its virtue and direction, it votes for people just like that. We get venal, corrupt, selfish leaders without integrity, honor, or virtue because we have become a nation of people with these characteristics. They represent us in more than simply policy decisions; they represent us as people as well.

VOTE FOR ME!

Even if, by some chance or act of God, some leader is elected who differs from this pattern, they are powerless and shunned. The politician now who is constitutionally responsible, has integrity, honor, and seeks liberty and future benefit for the nation over immediate comfort and gain is the outcast who will not play by the rules. They are the trouble maker, the rebel, the crazy guy who won’t shut up.

Imagine, if you will, some miraculous scenario where all three branches of government were somehow filled with your perfect ideal of a conservative servant of the people and the constitution. That sounds wonderful, right?

Now imagine what happens once they are sworn into office. That very second, the news media, popular culture, academia, and out-of-power Democrats begin to bombard every conceivable outlet from social media to film, TV, radio, newspaper, books, personal conversation, and more with the same message. Monsters. Tyrants. Horrific. Racist. Sexist. Homophobic. Islamophobic. Theocrats. Extremist. Draconian. They hate the elderly, children, handicapped, transexuals, minorities, women, on and on. They support rape. They support slavery. They’re trying to put you back in chains. They burn crosses. They’ll drag you in chains behind their pickup truck.

Every single policy position, every single vote, every single action would be met with carefully orchestrated, filmed, and broadcast rallies and protests. The pre-printed signs would be handed out, the paper-machet giant heads would be constructed, the streets closed off so that the “people” hired by groups like International A.N.S.W.E.R. can “spontaneously” take to the streets.

Every news broadcast would be filled with sad little faces and woeful stories of how horrific this bill is that hasn’t even taken effect and how its causing their puppy to starve. Every hit song would be about how horrible things are on the streets filled with starvation, misery, and death. Simply returning to how things were ten years ago would be depicted as Jim Crow times ten, packed with uninsured people dying on the streets.

And the people of the United States, bombarded with this in overwhelming fashion, would vote these people out in the next possible election, replacing them with radicals who would not only reverse what the Conservative Majority did, but go even further in the name of social justice and righting past wrongs. They’d use this chance and the momentum to go even further than ever before.

Who wins what office makes no difference. Until the nation undergoes a tremendous shift at the basic, cultural level, elections will only pour more of the same on this country and every new election makes matters worse. And that cultural shift takes time, not elections.

BUT THE COURTS!!

“Through the Mercy of Fools all Justice is lost.” -Rabbi Nachmanides

We’re at a point in this nation where the Supreme Court has been stuffed with a near-majority of members for whom the constitution is simply a set of words they can use to lever in anything the latest progressive positions hold. When a court has even a few judges who are utterly disinterested in constitution, wisdom, reason, justice, or sanity, that court ceases to have any validity whatseover. It has been corrupted to the point of being useless.

Arguments we have to get the right sort of politician in this position or that for The Judges ignores the utter destruction of the constitution and nation that has already been wrought by a supposed judicially sensible majority. After the utter abortion that was the Kelo vs New London decision, the court followed up with several horrendously decided trash cases which demonstrated that they cannot be trusted with power no matter who they are or what they claim about law.

Will a supreme court justice picked by a corrupt, horrible hag like Hillary Clinton be much worse than even a lying bozo like Donald Trump? Yes. But the bad is not a question of ruining the nation, its a question of how fast and in what direction. Its going that way anyway, its just a matter of how swiftly.

REMNANTS

Technically, the USA is still around, of course. We have the framework, sagging and rotted as it is, of what the country means still in place. There are the habits of a Republic still here. Technically we still vote. In name at least we have representatives in office. All of it still looks more or less the same. Its just been gutted, like the shell of an insect that has been burrowed out from within by parasites.

The only direction this nation goes from here on out is away from liberty, away from the founders, away from the great experiment, and toward inevitable failure and tyranny. There’s only one vector, even if it staggers a bit once in a while.

LET IT BURN

There’s a phrase some use to describe this attitude: “let it burn.” Some misunderstand this as a call to destroy the nation. But its not. Its a call to step back and give up the fight because its going down either way. For years now I’ve been telling everyone to focus locally, on family, neighbors, local politics. Your home, your area, your town. Because the federal government is a write-off. There is no fixing it through any elections.

That’s what Let It Burn means; not “revolution!!!” but rather “its already burning and the firefighters know it won’t be saved.” Let it Burn recognizes that its already on fire. We’re past the point of preventing it. We cannot save this Republic, until we get past the hard times ahead and begin the slow, painful process of rebuilding.

I’m sorry. I don’t like it either. but that doesn’t make it any less true. And recognizing this doesn’t make me a crazy old man. Just a sad one.

“Posterity–you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it.” -John Quincy Adams

Sorry, John. We didn’t. We gave it a pretty good run for a while, but its over.

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


I try always to understand in-depth and translate to modern language the words of the long-dead great men who founded this country. I always speak with deference and respect when talking about them or the blueprint for how this country is supposed to be that they left behind, otherwise known as The Constitution. Through their genius I found my faith and my calling. Nothing I ever say about freedom, liberty, or tyranny is ever mock-worthy, so to DGeorge I say simply....

LOL_by_chickapea17.gif


Blues

ETA: All of the bits of code above are supposed to be quotation marks. Not sure why they didn't carry over in the right format, but I don't have it in me to go through and fix 'em all. There's a link at the top if anybody wants to read it formatted properly.
 
Kansas Is A Constitutional Carry State. Anyone Who Has A Legal Right To Carry Can Carry Open Or Concealed. I Ride A Motorcycle And Am Considering Starting To Carry My 9mm Pistol. If I Am Approached By Law Enforcement For Any Reason, Should I Inform Him/Her That I Am Armed? And If So, How? I Have Asked Several Officers This Question And Have Gotten Different Responses From Each One.
wE mEET aGAIN, cAPITAN cAPITAL.
 
Kansas Is A Constitutional Carry State. Anyone Who Has A Legal Right To Carry Can Carry Open Or Concealed. I Ride A Motorcycle And Am Considering Starting To Carry My 9mm Pistol. If I Am Approached By Law Enforcement For Any Reason, Should I Inform Him/Her That I Am Armed? And If So, How? I Have Asked Several Officers This Question And Have Gotten Different Responses From Each One.


I live in Kansas. Kansas law states you do not have to inform Law Enforcement you have a CCW license. If you get stopped by a LEO and they run your driver's license your CCW license will appear on their computer. Although not required by Kansas law it is considered to be a courtesy to let the LEO know you have a CCW license and if you are carrying. LE will appreciate this.
 
I live in Kansas. Kansas law states you do not have to inform Law Enforcement you have a CCW license. If you get stopped by a LEO and they run your driver's license your CCW license will appear on their computer. Although not required by Kansas law it is considered to be a courtesy to let the LEO know you have a CCW license and if you are carrying. LE will appreciate this.

Do you also extend the same courtesy to clerks in convenience stores? Would they not feel more at easy when you, a complete stranger, walks into the store, especially if it is empty, if you said, I just want to let you know I have a CCW license and am a good guy, legal to carry a gun." I would think that would make them feel much safer. Or a taxi cab driver when you get in their cab? Or do LEO's deserve more courtesy than others?

And here's the deal with, "They are going to find out anyway when they run my driver's license.":

If I give them my CPL up front, first thing, before they know anything about me - they have no idea if the CPL is real or not nor whether it is valid, suspended or revoked. Do they take my word for it when I give them my driver's license that it is real and valid? Nope. They run it every time. It's the same with my CPL. So from Terry vs. Ohio:

We merely hold today that, where a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to conclude in light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot and that the persons with whom he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous, where, in the course of investigating this behavior, he identifies himself as a policeman and makes reasonable inquiries, and where nothing in the initial stages of the encounter serves to dispel his reasonable fear for his own or others' safety, he is entitled for the protection of himself and others in the area to conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing of such persons in an attempt to discover weapons which might be used to assault him. [p31] Such a search is a reasonable search under the Fourth Amendment, and any weapons seized may properly be introduced in evidence against the person from whom they were taken.

Once I offer my CPL to the officer and inform them of my gun, I have just provided the officer with reasonable suspicion that I am armed. There has only been one state court decision that I am aware of (and I can't remember which state it was in) that has every separated being armed from being dangerous merely because the person stopped told the officer they were armed. It would be a very far reach to expect any court to separate armed from dangerous when a person is detained by a police officer until the officer has verification that the license is valid. It would be a very far reach to expect any court to find that the officer does not have the authority to search for and seize firearms just because the person stopped disclosed the presence of the gun and presented a piece of paper which might be a valid license or might not. Therefore, I will NOT give the officer that reasonable suspicion by "confessing" to being armed when I am not required to by law.

Now, if the officer runs my driver's license and finds out I have a valid CPL (CCW permit) from the state, the situation has completely changed. Now these words from Terry apply: "and where nothing in the initial stages of the encounter serves to dispel his reasonable fear for his own or others' safety." Receiving notification from the state that a CPL or CCW Permit is valid for the individual stopped most certainly should dispel reasonable fear - that's the whole purpose of the CPL or CCW Permit. At that point the legal authority for the officer to search for and seize firearms should be completely removed, if the rest of the traffic stop is routine. Of course it is too late if the officer has already seized my gun, needlessly handling it, before they receive verification from the state that my CPL or CCW permit is valid.
 
"Always remember the police are TRAINED not to trust you"

Stop trusting who? My wife? My brother? Mom & dad?

That's crazy.

Someone else here was ranting that cops can't be "a fully trustworthy friend".

I can't be trusted because I was taught not to trust.

Circular logic much?
 
I was under impression that most CC people were inclined to be conservative, what I am hearing is a lot of the same counter culture rhetoric I heard from the hippy culture. " Off the Pigs" etc." Never trust anyone over thirty". "Turn off, drop out". Certainly Blues has thrown in the towel, he refuses to participate, won't cast his ballot. My opinion is that if you will not participate in the process you give up your right to complain. At least your complaints do not resonate in my ears. Name a time in human history where the " Im gonna eat some worms " people didn't exist.

There are always going to be corrupt brutal cops. There are always going to be corrupt brutal human beings. It is and always has been a condition our species. I don't believe the percentage of these types is any greater among the police than the general population. And of course as the Lt Comander has pointed out with his Youtube exhibit there are the examples of bad behavior. (That cop by the way was fired)

Youtube is also filled with jerks deliberately harassing the police video cameras, open carry of AKs on city streets. It reminds me of backseat children on a car trip putting their fingers an inch from ones face and teasingly saying " Im not touching you, Im not touching you". Gentlemen, I firmly believe that what goes around, comes around. I also believe you can't hide your attitude, and it is your attitude that gets you in trouble. When a policeman senses that attitude, his training tells him that maybe something isn't right and he may well take the traffic stop to the next level. Your choice.
 
"Always remember the police are TRAINED not to trust you"

Stop trusting who? My wife? My brother? Mom & dad?

That's crazy.

Someone else here was ranting that cops can't be "a fully trustworthy friend".

I can't be trusted because I was taught not to trust.

Circular logic much?

Law enforcement officers are trained not to trust the person they stop on the street or they interview as part of an investigation. This has nothing to do with any type of personal interaction or relationship, rather with officer safety and with common investigative procedures. That's their job. If they don't follow their training, it could lead to inadmissible evidence or a negative impact on their health (including loss of life).

It seems to me that you don't personally know any law enforcement officers. I do. I train with former and current law enforcement officers in firearms training classes. My instructors are typically former law enforcement officers and they tell me to limit my legal interaction with law enforcement to the minimum.

Please quote the actual post where "Someone else here was ranting that cops can't be "a fully trustworthy friend".". Otherwise, this part of your post is just trolling.
 
I was under impression that most CC people were inclined to be conservative, what I am hearing is a lot of the same counter culture rhetoric I heard from the hippy culture. " Off the Pigs" etc." Never trust anyone over thirty". "Turn off, drop out". Certainly Blues has thrown in the towel, he refuses to participate, won't cast his ballot. My opinion is that if you will not participate in the process you give up your right to complain. At least your complaints do not resonate in my ears. Name a time in human history where the " Im gonna eat some worms " people didn't exist.

There are always going to be corrupt brutal cops. There are always going to be corrupt brutal human beings. It is and always has been a condition our species. I don't believe the percentage of these types is any greater among the police than the general population. And of course as the Lt Comander has pointed out with his Youtube exhibit there are the examples of bad behavior. (That cop by the way was fired)

Youtube is also filled with jerks deliberately harassing the police video cameras, open carry of AKs on city streets. It reminds me of backseat children on a car trip putting their fingers an inch from ones face and teasingly saying " Im not touching you, Im not touching you". Gentlemen, I firmly believe that what goes around, comes around. I also believe you can't hide your attitude, and it is your attitude that gets you in trouble. When a policeman senses that attitude, his training tells him that maybe something isn't right and he may well take the traffic stop to the next level. Your choice.

I don't think that your post applies to anyone that posted in this thread. I guess I have to repost my earlier post, as you don't seem to get it. No one in this thread is arguing for a confrontational interaction with LEOs.

This is what I don't get: blind trust. You carry a firearm for self defense, yet you blindly trust any LEO that approaches you. You do not personally know that LEO and you do not know what kind of a day he/she had. You purely trust that LEO, because he/she is a LEO, based on a citizen-LEO relationship concept that exists only in your imagination.

Limiting your legal interaction with law enforcement is all about protecting yourself by asserting your rights, i.e., about self defense. None of this has to do with having a "chip on a shoulder" or giving a LEO a "lot of lip and attitude". You can believe all you want that a LEO is your friend during a traffic stop, but ask any of your LEO friends how they are trained to conduct a traffic stop. Ask any of your LEO friends what they tell their family about legal interaction with law enforcement.

Be polite, follow all lawful commands and provide the minimum amount of information needed. Do not consent to any search or seizure. The side of the road is not the place to settle any arguments. That's what the courts are for.

Understand that this is not only about self defense against abusive LEOs, but also against any laws you may actually knowingly or unknowingly have broken. Imagine if Shaneen Allen would have been aware of her rights and asserted them. The duty to inform a LEO that you carry a firearm only applies to law-abiding citizens as the law breaker has his/her 5th Amendment right to not incriminate himself/herself. Shannon Allen would have received a traffic ticket and would have been on her way, instead, she was arrested on the spot and charged with a felony. [SARCASM]Thank god Ray Rice beat his wife unconscious and Shaneen Allen was able to enter the Pre Trial Intervention Program.[/SARCASM]
 
Come on! We are talking about informing a police officer during a traffic stop that you are armed. THATS ALL. I am of the school that says it is better to inform. THATS ALL. I do not advise spilling your guts to any LEO you encounter. I also advise a person to have an attitude adjustment when having that encounter.

In the off chance your cow is discovered by the police officer during said stop and you didn't inform, it could be the subject of some awkward misunderstanding. That is not good.
 
In the off chance your cow is discovered by the police officer during said stop and you didn't inform, it could be the subject of some awkward misunderstanding. That is not good.

How many examples in real life have you heard/seen of that happening? Having been reading forums and paying attention to firearms issues for 15 years now, I have read about/seen examples of probably a dozen cases where the police officer has disarmed the subject needlessly after being informed by citizen and shown a CPL/CCW permit - which puts everyone in danger due to handling the gun needlessly. I have read/seen 2 or 3 examples where the officer just went nuts, like Harless did after being informed. I have not read about or seen a single example of where the officer discovered a CCW and has done anything. In fact, I have a personal example:

Stopped for speeding with my wife, daughter and her friend in car (we were looking for a park in an unfamiliar town to go to a reunion). Officer takes all my paperwork back to his car, comes back to my window and asks me to step out of the car. I'm taken by surprise at that because that has never happened before. Up to this point I have not said anything about my stainless steel Taurus PT-145 open carried in a holster on my belt nor my CPL. Officer proceeds to walk back to the space between our vehicles and waits. Hmmm....my shirt is tucked in, not much chance to conceal the gun. I can't leave it loaded in the vehicle because none of the other occupants had a CPL and it would be illegal to leave the gun loaded in the vehicle. I'm not about to take the gun out of the holster and unload it. Oh well.....

Exited the vehicle. Approached the officer with my hands in plain sight - but not raised or anything. Officer said he didn't want to "lecture" me in front of the wife and kids but I really needed to slow down and he was going to let me go with a warning. He gave me my paperwork back, we said pleasant goodbyes and both returned to our vehicles. Not a word or any action was taken about/due to the openly carried .45 on my belt.

I'm just saying like all of life there are no guarantees - but it seems like in real life there are greater odds of the officer taking your gun from you or going nuts if you tell them about it rather than just keeping your mouth shut about it (when allowed to by law). My goal is to retain possession of my gun, if at all possible.
 
Please quote the actual post where "Someone else here was ranting that cops can't be "a fully trustworthy friend".". Otherwise, this part of your post is just trolling.

I didn't say it exactly like that, but it's a reasonable inference from what I did say.

The only caveat I failed to include is that cops can certainly be fully trustworthy friends to each other, which they all too often are as they cover for each other for all manner of crime, brutality, rights violations etc. just as regular as clockwork. The "thin blue line" is a myth. It's a massive blue wall, more solid in its foundation than the Great Wall of China. People who threaten the structure of that wall suffer worse consequences than most of the "regular" citizens who suffer from it daily. Just ask Jay Dobyns or any number of whistle-blowers from inside the Fast and Furious investigation all the way back to Frank Serpico (and way further back than that in fact). It got so bad for a group of BATFE agents and employees that they created a website devoted only to documenting abuses against themselves and other LEOs by their own agencies and fellow LEOs within those agencies. Every once in awhile the rarely-seen-or-heard-from honest cop comes forward to tell the truth about that wall of silence, even if somewhat downplayed in the rest of the piece like this one from PoliceMag.com:

Fairly or not, the whistleblower has been perceived as having betrayed some manner of allegiance and is often branded a traitor. And while the lack of honor among thieves is no surprise, allegiance is expected of officers.

LEO-to-LEO equals fully trustworthy good friend potential, unless and until one of the LEOs deigns to take the side of the citizen/law/rights that they're sworn to protect/enforce/defend. And if they do take the side of the citizen/law/rights, it's not just the cop who they sided against that will treat them as traitors, it's virtually every other cop who knows or ever learns of their betrayal of the Giant Blue Wall.

LEO-to-citizen equals untrustworthy. No one will ever convince me that that stance is "extreme" or unreasonable, or most significantly, unwise or harmful to one's self for holding that view. I will never be harmed by keeping my distance from cops to the extent that I have control over, nor even so much as disappointed like I was in the event detailed at the link in my sig-line. The absolute best any citizen can say about how adherent to The Constitution a cop will remain if they become friends is, you just never know....

Blues
 
I just want Blues insight on a scenario....

Cop gets a call: someone robbed the local rob-n-go, left in X vehicle, possibly armed

Said cop sees you in matching X vehicle driving along some few miles from said rob-n-go, blue lights you, walks to the window "Do you know why I stopped you?" -
No
"Are you armed?"
-???

I would equate the likelihood of this scenario equal to that of you being in a justifiable shoot situation or running into a cop who's gonna drag you out because you handed over your permit. But what's the answer?
 
Wait...the cop is pulling over a vehicle that matches the description of an armed robbery get away vehicle and he just strolls up the window to ask questions? Hahahahahaha

Sent from my SM-N920T using USA Carry mobile app
 

New Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,531
Messages
610,694
Members
75,032
Latest member
BLACKROCK6
Back
Top