Only reasonable suspicion he has is a vehicle description, possibly armed does not equate to armed robbery
Law Enforcement Officers And Concealed Carry.
- Thread starter markjoy1213
- Start date
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
Btw, being asked if you are armed is completely different than voluntarily providing the information before the question comes up...my answer to the dumbass cop who approached a possible armed robber with just questions would be a "yes" and then if he wanted to disarm me I would say "I do not submit to any searches or seizures but I won't physically resist." Then I'll let a lawyer talk for me.
Sent from my SM-N920T using USA Carry mobile app
Sent from my SM-N920T using USA Carry mobile app
I didn't say it was the same - I was just curious to the responses. I completely agree with not saying anything you're not legally required to, but I don't see where silently offering your permit as falling under the guise of 'saying' anything either.
For as many theoretical reasons as there are to not notify, just as many can be thought of that would support notifying. I reside in a must inform state so I don't really have a horse in the race - but I know of 0 cases where this has caused issue, and only a handful where it has even brought about unnecessary handling.
I see both sides of it honestly - permitting is an infringement to begin with, much less unnecessary handling, but at the same time courtesy can do a lot to ease tension in a situation - if it weren't a tense situation I would dare say this wouldn't be a topic for concern.
bofh
Banned
Two practical reasons not to notify from last year:
Concealed Carrier Has Firearm Taken And Disassembled By Police During Routine Traffic Stop, Is Then Searched
Concealed Carry Holder Disarmed by Police with Guns Drawn
Concealed Carrier Has Firearm Taken And Disassembled By Police During Routine Traffic Stop, Is Then Searched
Concealed Carry Holder Disarmed by Police with Guns Drawn
Reason one is actually disputable as a reason not to notify. The cop saw his card, he never offered it, and it went from there.
If you're going to not inform, letting them glimpse the card is an instant inference that 'there's a gun and he doesn't want me to know'.
That's going to immediately throw an alarm, c'mon.
I can't see the video for number 2, but I don't doubt there are overreactions. Suggesting potential overreaction is a reason to not inform is almost as good as suggesting mass shootings is a reason to ban guns. Different subject matter, same logic. Same as we can't prove the number of mass shootings stopped by carriers, how many no incident voluntary informs happen is immeasurable.
It amazes me we, as gun owners/enthusiasts/whatever, quibble over things like this, then wonder why we keep losing rights to slow paced erosions. Each of us has experiences that influence how we interact with LEOs, or anyone for that matter, and should understand that we're all different and going to approach things somewhat differently.
As an insight on situations like these, I will share my personal line of reasoning - don't apply the following to yourself and get all boohoo if you disagree, this is my opinion.
There are expectations required of oneself if you are going to carry a firearm.
-You should be proficient in the safe handling and operation of it.
-You should never break the 4 rules
-You should be prepared to use it if necessitated
-You should know what situations define necessitated to you
-You should be prepared to wind up face down on the ground over it
-You should be prepared for the ensuing legal nightmare that may arise from using it
If I couldn't make it through this list I would not carry. I'm sure some will pick apart these 6 points (especially 3-6), but this is what I feel necessary to justify carrying.
Blueshell
Banned
Isn't the whole point of carrying concealed to be keeping the gun's presence to yourself?
If you're going to announce it to every cop (and in some states every DOT official and home owner/tenant when you enter) then just OC.
Not always available - I'm in one of the waning number of States that has no feasible OC to speak of, but you emphasized my point. Announcing by accident what you have no plans of announcing intentionally is user error.
bofh
Banned
Thank you for acknowledging that an officer finding out that someone may be legally armed automatically perceives this person as a threat. The rest of the Terry stop goes from there. There are a number of things wrong with this stop, but you don't seem to care. I am merely offering solutions to those that do care.
Now that's quite a fallacy you constructed there. If you don't care that your rights and your body get violated during a traffic stop, then say so. A low probability of becoming a victim is never a valid argument.
So, you are saying that I should not invoke my rights when confronted by law enforcement in order not to erode them? You don't make any sense.
As a legally armed citizen, I have broken no law. Any officer drawing a gun on me in a traffic stop like this will find himself in court afterwards. Just because I am prepared to be violated by a LEO, doesn't mean I approve it or actively facilitate it.
In summary, if there is no legal requirement to inform, don't. There is no upside in informing, unless you believe in fairy tales.
bofh
Banned
It doesn't matter if you announce that you are carrying legally or if the LEO discovers it somehow. The LEO either already knows that you have an active permit and that you do not have any outstanding warrants, or he doesn't. If the LEO knows that you have an active permit and that you do not have any outstanding warrants, then the LEO has no reason to handle you any different. If the LEO, doesn't know, then you just gave the LEO intentionally or unintentionally a reason to get you out of the car and disarm you (see Terry stop).
bofh
Banned
Note that we haven't even talked about state-specific laws and other circumstances.
For example, in my state, Tennessee, you can legally have loaded firearms in the car without a permit, open or concealed. It can be any type of firearm. There is no duty to inform. Also, Tennessee is one of very few stupid states that requires a permit for open and concealed carry. The driver license system is connected to the handgun carry permit system. This has implications for traffic stops in Tennessee. I rather not announce that I am armed until it is necessary to avoid complications and to protect my rights.
Also, we had quite a few fake police officers in my area recently driving in unmarked vehicles and stopping people with police lights mounted behind their windshield, in fake uniforms and with fake badges. I am certainly not going to announce that I am armed when I am getting stopped by an unmarked car. I will be calling 911.
For example, in my state, Tennessee, you can legally have loaded firearms in the car without a permit, open or concealed. It can be any type of firearm. There is no duty to inform. Also, Tennessee is one of very few stupid states that requires a permit for open and concealed carry. The driver license system is connected to the handgun carry permit system. This has implications for traffic stops in Tennessee. I rather not announce that I am armed until it is necessary to avoid complications and to protect my rights.
Also, we had quite a few fake police officers in my area recently driving in unmarked vehicles and stopping people with police lights mounted behind their windshield, in fake uniforms and with fake badges. I am certainly not going to announce that I am armed when I am getting stopped by an unmarked car. I will be calling 911.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
In my state (AL) there's no requirement to notify. However, there is a statutory requirement to answer truthfully if asked about weapons in the vehicle, which I would do with one exception: If I thought there was even a slight chance that I might be arrested for suspicion of having committed a crime, I wouldn't answer any questions. But like Chen alludes to, if my vehicle matches the description of a getaway car from an armed robbery, it's going to be a felony stop, which means they'll remove me from my vehicle from behind cover most likely, prone me out, search for weapons and disarm me before they even ask my name.
When you say that your scenario is equal to "you being in a justifiable shoot situation," I take it you mean the cop can justifiably shoot me after asking if I'm armed? Or do you mean I'd be justified somehow to shoot at cops? Either way, with just the information you've included in your hypothetical, I see no justification for anybody shooting at all.
Blues
1) I actually agree with you here, and do care that there are multiple things wrong with the stop. Regardless, knowing you may be perceived as a threat and then acting as if you will not be is pretty silly, especially in a situation such as the first link you provided. If the gentleman had no intent to notify and his permit never seen the light of day, would the situation have been such a mess? Whichever side of notification you find yourself on, there are things that will increase the perception that you may be a threat - don't do those things.
A low probability of becoming a victim is never the argument - but it is one of the arguments. If you don't notify because you don't want unnecessary handling, to be potentially wrongly searched, etc - you are arguing for not notifying due to the low probability you may become a victim.
Never said a thing about not invoking your rights. No clue where you pulled that from.
And next to last, I agree wholeheartedly. I was simply pointing out my view. If I carry I raise my chances significantly of being violated by LEO, that doesn't make it right but it should make me more aware of what I do and how I do it.
Lastly, this opinion, and the fact that others do not hold it, is the whole purpose of the conversation.
I was just throwing a situation out where there is an unknown variable, doesn't have to be armed robbery, could be a myriad number of other things where a situation gets escalated simply because of a choice to not inform. My experience is that most LEOs here don't care, haven't seen it come to firearm handling yet, but that goes back to we make decisions based on our experiences.
There are undoubtedly scenarios in which voluntarily handing your permit over aids in resolution, just as there are scenarios in which it aids in escalation. I view these equally probable as the two incidents linked earlier, having to use a firearm in self defense, or having an encounter in which LEO is abashedly negligent because they were informed.
When I equated them earlier I should have said the probability was equal. We are discussing situations that are about as likely as one of us being involved in a self-defense use(justifiable shoot). That was unrelated to the scenario, sorry for the confusion.
I understand it is your right and you are using it, what I do not understand is the badgering of those who have said they feel otherwise. If it is your right, then it is theirs also. And if you can use it, they can choose not to.
Understanding what makes each person choose their course of action is what interests me, and I was (unsuccessfully) trying to give a situation where a LEO didn't have much information to go on. In that case not informing, followed by an affirmative response to weapons could escalate a situation unnecessarily, whereas a voluntary inform could ease tension.
A thought I had through all this... Why do you answer any questions? The video earlier essentially gave reason to not say a word ever. Anybody hard-line to that?
Blueshell
Banned
If the question could be used to incriminate you, you don't have to answer. Remember that you do have to inform the cop that you are invoking your right to remain silent. Simply keeping silent is no longer good enough. Once you invoke this right, if you brake it at any time, it's broken, so once you decide to be silent you have to say so and then shut up. The cop will do what the cop will do. During the stop is not the time to make a stand. Cooperate, and whatever is unjust will be ruled so in court later.
Let me get this straight.... you are saying that if a cop catches a glimpse of a card in my wallet that I am required to be fingerprinted for and pass a background check to obtain, that is going to immediately throw an alarm?!?!!!! If a cop goes on the defense because he sees evidence that I have actually paid the government to fingerprint me and do a background check on me - that is EXACTLY the type of cop that I don't want to tell about my gun. That's as bad as the people who say the cop is going to become suspicious if they go back to their car and run my driver's license and find out from the state that I have a CPL. That's got to be the most nonsensical excuse for informing up front when not required to by law that there is.
The fact that some people feel the need to cater to these irrational reactions from police officers is one of the reasons why these irrational reactions continue to be excused and even expected from them.
I don't really disagree, but that's exactly what happened to the fellow in the linked story earlier in the thread. Making my point - if you're not gonna inform, don't do it by careless happenstance.
bofh
Banned
??? Don't do what exactly. Don't inadvertently show your carry permit? You do understand that you do argue for not notifying an officer, because you will be automatically perceived as a threat, right? Hence, I say, don't notify. That's the reason why I posted the link.
Shortly after I wrote that sentence, I realized that you will take it out of context. So here is the full version: A low probability of becoming a victim is never a valid argument not to do everything possible to protect myself from becoming a victim. I am arguing for not notifying as the probability of becoming a victim is HIGHER when notifying.
From your post:
... such as not notifying that you carry, right?
May be, you should be more clear in your arguments.
My point was if you're going to not inform, inadvertantly showing your permit is something I would be sure to avoid.
I never said you should not invoke your right to not inform, my concern is the hard line - informing is a no-no period. That's essentially telling someone of a different opinion that their right to inform should not be used.
Lastly, there are numerous occasions where informing created hugely inappropriate situations and infringements, but neither of us can statistically compare that to the number of times informing does not create a situation at all. The suggestion that informing is proportionally more dangerous is baseless - no issue stops don't particularly make good news for either side.
Lastly, I have never been stopped in a location where informing was voluntary, and I do enjoy this conversation. It has provided a lot of food for thought on what to do should I find myself in those circumstances.
Thanks! I understand what your point is now.
