Good thing he didn't ask because things may have turned out differently. Had he asked, you would have had to produce it (assuming your state law requires you to have a permit to OC). LEOs are never "off duty" and ALWAYS have the authority to investigate if a crime is in progress regardless of whether or not they are on their 8/10/12 hour shift. Just because he/she is hired by a private company does not mean they are only private security; LEOs are LEOs 24/7/365 even when in plain clothes at the grocery store shopping for their groceries. Guess it's a good thing he didn't ask.
I am in Ohio and OC is legal in Oh without a permit. I do need a CCW permit to carry loaded in my vehicle. And no crime was in progress, so there wouldn't be anything to investigate.
You are missing one critical portion of the Terry v. Ohio ruling in that analysis. Terry v. Ohio allows an officer to conduct a "Terry stop" when there is reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person may be armed. Unlawful (until dispelled) carrying of a firearm meets the "criminal" portion of the ruling and the nature of a firearm meets the "armed" portion. Driving a car with no license in no way lends itself to being armed in and of itself; a pistol strapped on obviously does.
There is also a distinguishable between DWLSR (a misdemeanor) and unlawful carrying of a firearm (felony). Anytime a LEO contacts anyone who is armed (felony in progress if not permitted, at least down here in FL), it's standard procedure, and has been upheld, to see if they have a permit. The fact that OPs state doesn't require a permit for OC would make the initial concern of being asked irrelevant unless he saw OP get out of his car.
You are missing one critical portion of the Terry v. Ohio ruling in that analysis. Terry v. Ohio allows an officer to conduct a "Terry stop/frisk" when there is reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person may be armed.
is a true statement because, in Florida, it is pretty much illegal to walk by a cop with a visible gun, even though it would be perfectly legal to do so in 43 states, and in most of those states you would get a nod of approval from the officer for doing so (carrying the firearm...not robbing a bank!)If someone walks by a cop with a gun and decides to rob the bank, all hell will break loose because the cop didn't stop the guy to investigate and the public will have his job.
amsgator.... Is it ok in your state for a cop to stop you for breaking NO TRAFFIC LAWS (while driving a vehicle) just to see if you have a drivers license?
As long as the "ripe" retiring citizens of this great country keep flocking from y'alls state(s) to Florida I don't think y'all will have an issue with the mindset leaving here and moving there.
I fail to understand the fear of showing ID or permit when asked by legitimate authority. We are not as yet in an adversarial relationship with Law Enforcement in this country, are we? Unless you are part of the criminal element, that is...
Unless you are a cop, you probably won't know how many times the store or bank where you are shopping has been robbed in the last month, or the fact that somebody just hit a convenience store two blocks away and drove away in a car that looks just like yours. That cop's main concern is to go home at the end of his shift. He's putting his life on the line to keep YOU safe. Give him a break and make his life easier. Smile. Show him the ID, even if it isn't required by law. Put his mind at ease. Next time he sees you, he'll know you're one of the good guys.
If you get belligerent and whine about your rights being violated, you give all of us who carry a bad name, you create resentment, and you drive a wedge between all law abiding citizens who carry to protect our families and the cops who protect us all professionally.
unevrno said:How bout we close this by agreeing that it's never a good idea to argue with a LEO, regardless of the issue.
Axeanda45,
There's a couple of things you must realize here. First, in his posting about Terry v. Ohio, amsgator left out two key words.
The two words that amsgator left out are "and dangerous" as in "armed and dangerous".
Now, in Florida, that really doesn't change anything because in Florida a person who is armed is automatically considered dangerous. In 1987-88 the Police Chiefs Association of Florida opposed licensed concealed carry in Florida.
Link Removed
Both the PCA and the Florida Sheriff's Association opposed open carry this year. Apparently the police in Florida would rather people hid their firearms from them, rather than knowing who is armed.
The Glass House of Florida Law Enforcement : Liberty Underground
They are so afraid at the sight of a firearm in Florida that it was like pulling teeth just to make it not a crime to accidentally display a hint of a firearm in Florida. Up until this year, a person who simply bent over to pick something up and accidentally let the handgrip of his firearm peek out from under his shirt could legally be pounced upon by Florida law enforcement like he was Jesse James.
In Florida you have to remember that:
is a true statement because, in Florida, it is pretty much illegal to walk by a cop with a visible gun, even though it would be perfectly legal to do so in 43 states, and in most of those states you would get a nod of approval from the officer for doing so (carrying the firearm...not robbing a bank!)
And that's what amsgator failed to take into account. Most of the rest of the United States do not have the oppressive firearms carry laws that Florida does. In most of the rest of the United States the sight of a handgun carried in a holster does not cause the legislature, police and a major portion of the general populace to suffer a sudden and acute case of loss of bladder control.
That being the case, in most of the United States, if a police officer were to detain an individual for no other reason than they were carrying a visible firearm, whether or not a permit was required to carry that firearm, the police officer would be committing a crime and would be violating the 4th Amendment rights of the citizen, because absent any other indications the police officer would have no reasonable and articulable suspicion that a crime was being committed. Florida, unfortunately, is not like most of the rest of the United States.
The challenge for us in the rest of the United States is that we need to be careful to ensure that the idea that carrying a visible firearm is somehow suspicious remains confined to state like Florida, Texas, Oklahoma and Illinois.
Garbage collectors, fishermen and farmers die on the job more frequently than cops do.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?