Pulled over with handgun in glove box

[FN1910]

My understanding was that if you have a CWP you could no longer carry in the glove box or console. I though you HAD to carry it on you (or in a purse for a woman). Is that wrong? Once I get my CWP I would still be more comfortable if I could move the pistol to the glove box when I was driving.

That was the interpretation by one sheriff in SC and in fact made some arrests for that even though the SCAG abd courts ruled against him. The result was a law passed last session by the legislature specifically stating different. If you have a permit you can carry concealed on or about your person including in the glove box or console. Many times I will take mine and lay it on the seat beside me and cover it with a towel or put it in the console. As you say sitting on it can be uncomfortable.

 

[tattedupboy]

Let me just add that South Carolina's permit is a concealed weapon permit, not a conceal on your person permit. That means that as long as it's concealed, it does not necessarily have to be on your person.

 

[FN1910]

Let me just add that South Carolina's permit is a concealed weapon permit, not a conceal on your person permit. That means that as long as it's concealed, it does not necessarily have to be on your person.

Not entirely true:

(6) "Concealable weapon" means a firearm having a length of less than twelve inches measured along its greatest dimension that must be carried in a manner that is hidden from public view in normal wear of clothing except when needed for self-defense, defense of others, and the protection of real or personal property.

The SCAG issued an opinion that a ladies handbag meets the standard for normal wear of clothing but did not elaborate further. Most have taken it to also mean such things a men's brief cases but that has not been tested in court. The only allowance for carry in the law is covered by clothing which would be on your person. The LEO that I have talked to agree that they would not bother with such a tight ruling but could not say that is would not stand up in court.

 

[tattedupboy]

Not entirely true:



The SCAG issued an opinion that a ladies handbag meets the standard for normal wear of clothing but did not elaborate further. Most have taken it to also mean such things a men's brief cases but that has not been tested in court. The only allowance for carry in the law is covered by clothing which would be on your person. The LEO that I have talked to agree that they would not bother with such a tight ruling but could not say that is would not stand up in court.

Outside of a vehicle, I don't know too many ways to conceal a handgun except on one's person, in a purse/handbag, a briefcase, or in a backpack. In a vehicle, if it's not on the person, it can only be concealed in the glovebox, center console, under the seat, or on a seat with a towel or other covering. Can't imagine why, even with the attorney general's ruling, why the police would give anyone a hard time carrying in one of these ways.

 

[gdcleanfun]

Outside of a vehicle, I don't know too many ways to conceal a handgun except on one's person, in a purse/handbag, a briefcase, or in a backpack. In a vehicle, if it's not on the person, it can only be concealed in the glovebox, center console, under the seat, or on a seat with a towel or other covering. Can't imagine why, even with the attorney general's ruling, why the police would give anyone a hard time carrying in one of these ways.

How to conceal a handgun without carrying on your person? How about in a stroller? My g/f "walks" her dogs in a stroller, they are old and diabetic, and she keeps her pistol in the "sun-bonnet" area, covered. How many moms might keep their pistols in the same place? How about carrying in a rolling briefcase? Lawyers, drug sales people, students, anyone with a back problem might do that...lots of room there. Any time I see someone with a loose fitting article of clothing or if they have "luggage," I try to ascertain if they are carrying. It's a game I've begun playing with myself, I'm trying to condition myself to conceal in better ways, learning what works, what not to do! Even my son has jumped on board, telling me what clothing allows for prints and what doesn't, even without being asked, that's saying a heck of a lot for an ADHD kid!

 

[LVLouisCyphre]

I also thought you meant the hand gun. Maybe I read it wrong as well.

I'm curious about the law. I don't know if it's the same in other states as it is in Nevada. Opencarry.org has a Link Removed. You'll see a great disparity on unlicensed open or vehicle carry over licensed or permitted CCW even in the "shall issue" States.

Every State is different. I make it a point to attempt to keep track of the States I frequently travel to. Opencarry.org has a Link Removed on vehicle carry. You'll note a great disparity between unlicensed open carry and licensed or permitted CCW.

Here, we can carry firearms in our vehicles because they are considered extensions of our homes and we can have concealed firearms in our homes.

Not quite, the reason we can have them concealed in our vehicles is because there's no NRS prohibiting it. The AG also made an opinion that carrying concealed applies to on or about your person in Nevada, not within your vehicle. The States that immediately come to mind where your vehicle is an extension of your home are LA and NM. It is not an extension of your home in Nevada. You can get arrested or cited for illegal CCW or possession of a firearm in a K-12 school, college, university or child care facility if it is concealed in your vehicle with a NV CFP, recognized CCW or nothing.

I wonder about the history behind carrying in our cars. I have a ccw so I can carry concealed upon my person. But if I had no ccw then I could not conceal the pistol on me while I was in my car. I could only have it concealed in the car itself.

It stems from NV AG Opinion 93-14 which clearly defines the NV CCW statute as applying to carrying concealed on your person or a container carried by the person not it being concealed in your vehicle.

The pistol is just as easily brought into fire position from the center console as it is from my hip, so, I'm wondering, if the pistol is in the center console and is as accessible to me as it would be if it were on my hip, why won't the law allow me to have the pistol concealed on my hip while in my car just as I am able to do in my home?

Because of the way the NRS is written and the AG opinion I have referenced.

Does anyone know the history behind the way the codes or the case laws came about to have this distinction?

See above.

 

[Stratus41298]

What grounds did you have the right to search the car?? I hope your not going to say because he had a gun? I will be polite to a officer who gives it first if they walk up like they are hot Sh*t then i will return it right back to them. I love how some LEO walk around thinking they are the only ones who have a right to carry a gun. You always get "Why do you carry a gun" Or "Why would you want to carry a gun".

In CT we have what is called "Reasonable Suspicion". As long as you suspect there could be something to that guy, you can stop and frisk his person or vehicle. In fact, with vehicles, an officer and frisk the car, search any and all unlocked, easily accessible containers (trunk doesn't count). Officer's safety is a big priority here.

 

[Glock Fan]

What grounds did you have the right to search the car?? I hope your not going to say because he had a gun? I will be polite to a officer who gives it first if they walk up like they are hot Sh*t then i will return it right back to them. I love how some LEO walk around thinking they are the only ones who have a right to carry a gun. You always get "Why do you carry a gun" Or "Why would you want to carry a gun".

She didn't "search" the car. The OP told her that he had a loaded gun in the glove box and asked her if she wanted to retrieve it.

I think the encounter went well. The part that confused the OP is why the officer returned the firearm unloaded and said "It's safer that way".



gf

 

[gdcleanfun]

Every State is different. I make it a point to attempt to keep track of the States I frequently travel to. Opencarry.org has a Link Removed on vehicle carry. You'll note a great disparity between unlicensed open carry and licensed or permitted CCW.

Not quite, the reason we can have them concealed in our vehicles is because there's no NRS prohibiting it. The AG also made an opinion that carrying concealed applies to on or about your person in Nevada, not within your vehicle. The States that immediately come to mind where your vehicle is an extension of your home are LA and NM. It is not an extension of your home in Nevada. You can get arrested or cited for illegal CCW or possession of a firearm in a K-12 school, college, university or child care facility if it is concealed in your vehicle with a NV CFP, recognized CCW or nothing.

It stems from NV AG Opinion 93-14 which clearly defines the NV CCW statute as applying to carrying concealed on your person or a container carried by the person not it being concealed in your vehicle.

Because of the way the NRS is written and the AG opinion I have referenced.

See above.

Thanks, Netentity, your post/response was very thorough.

 

[NavyLCDR]

It depends on where you are. Kalifornia registers handguns. All handgun sales have to go through an FFL and have to be registered with the state. I just got a gun from my son in Idaho and had to pay $19 to register it with Kalifornia. I basically only did that because if I get my Kalifornia CCW renewed this year, I want to put the new gun on it (and drop the P220 since I never carry it).

maybejim,
I am assuming you meant that you just obtained a gun from an FFL in California who received that gun from your son in Idaho. If not, you have just admitted to committing a felony:

18 USC 922:

(a) It shall be unlawful—
(3) for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that this paragraph (A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State, (B) shall not apply to the transportation or receipt of a firearm obtained in conformity with subsection (b)(3) of this section, and (C) shall not apply to the transportation of any firearm acquired in any State prior to the effective date of this chapter;

and implicated your son in comitting a separate felony:
18 USC 922:

(a) It shall be unlawful—
(5) for any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in which the transferor resides; except that this paragraph shall not apply to
(A) the transfer, transportation, or delivery of a firearm made to carry out a bequest of a firearm to, or an acquisition by intestate succession of a firearm by, a person who is permitted to acquire or possess a firearm under the laws of the State of his residence, and
(B) the loan or rental of a firearm to any person for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes;

US CODE: Title 18,922. Unlawful acts

 

[maybejim]

maybejim,
I am assuming you meant that you just obtained a gun from an FFL in California who received that gun from your son in Idaho. If not, you have just admitted to committing a felony:

Not really. I own and live in a place periodically (soon to be the majority of the time) in Idaho. It is legal for a father, son, grandfather or mother, daughter, grandmother, (and a few other family members) to gift guns to the close non-prohibited (to own a firearm) relative. I have registered the G-27 with the State of Kalifornia. And of course I would never bring the gun into the State of Kalifornia before I had registered it there. I filed the papers and sent in the check, which they cashed, and have heard nothing from the State of Kalifornia.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Not really. I own and live in a place periodically (soon to be the majority of the time) in Idaho. It is legal for a father, son, grandfather or mother, daughter, grandmother, (and a few other family members) to gift guns to the close non-prohibited (to own a firearm) relative. I have registered the G-27 with the State of Kalifornia. And of course I would never bring the gun into the State of Kalifornia before I had registered it there. I filed the papers and sent in the check, which they cashed, and have heard nothing from the State of Kalifornia.

Well, if you received the gun in Idaho, as an Idaho resident, then it would have been legal for any Idaho resident to gift you the gun, regardless of relationship.

And, yes, there is a Kalifornia exception for gifting of guns from immediate family members not having to be done through an FFL, but that would only apply to an immediate family member who was also a citizen of the great people's republik of Kalifornia, comrade!

 

[maybejim]

There is a legal problem with owning two residences. Kalifornia says if you are residing in that great socialist state for 10 days or more, you are supposed to get a Kalifornia Drivers license. Idaho says if you are residing in that great Constitution and gun friendly state for more than 60 days you have to get an Idaho Drivers License. I will be residing in Idaho for 2-4 months at a time a couple or 3 times a year, and in Kalifornia for a month or two or three at a time several times a year. What is a guy supposed to do? Change drivers licenses several times a year? I spoke to a representative of the Secretary of State for Idaho and they had nothing to suggest, just if I was going to be in Idaho for over 60 days, I needed to get a Drivers License.

 

[gdcleanfun]

There is a legal problem with owning two residences. Kalifornia says if you are residing in that great socialist state for 10 days or more, you are supposed to get a Kalifornia Drivers license. Idaho says if you are residing in that great Constitution and gun friendly state for more than 60 days you have to get an Idaho Drivers License. I will be residing in Idaho for 2-4 months at a time a couple or 3 times a year, and in Kalifornia for a month or two or three at a time several times a year. What is a guy supposed to do? Change drivers licenses several times a year? I spoke to a representative of the Secretary of State for Idaho and they had nothing to suggest, just if I was going to be in Idaho for over 60 days, I needed to get a Drivers License.

Don't quote me, but I believe that the IRS says: in whichever state you spend 51% of your time during that year, from January to December, then that state is your primary residential state. That may help you to determine which state would be your primary residential state, and the one to issue you your primary driver's license.

For example, this site said:
Quote:
Treasury Regulations
Treasury Regulations section 1.121-1(b)(2) states that when a taxpayer uses more than one residence, the determination of the principal residence depends upon all the facts and circumstances. If a taxpayer alternates between two homes and uses each one as a residence, the principal residence would generally be the one the taxpayer uses the majority of the time during the year. For example, assume H and W are married taxpayers who own two homes, one in Ohio and the other in Florida, for five years (2000 through 2004), and spend 30 weeks each year in the Ohio home and 22 weeks each year in the Florida home. The home in Ohio typically would be considered the principal residence because it is used for the majority of the year. Selling the Florida home would not result in gain exclusion, while selling the Ohio home would.
End Quote.

In one state you might be considered a resident, therefore, residing and needing a driver's license. In the other state, you may be considered a vacationer, as are snowbirds, rather than a resident. Check with the IRS to be sure.

 

[maybejim]

In one state you might be considered a resident, therefore, residing and needing a driver's license. In the other state, you may be considered a vacationer, as are snowbirds, rather than a resident. Check with the IRS to be sure.

The way the laws are written, it really doesn't make any difference where your tax home is (which for state tax I believe can be split between states). They say if you are in Kalifornia for 10 days or more (living there I suppose not vacationing which is what I would be doing though that's apparently not the way the law is written) you have to get a license. Basically the same for Idaho except it is 60 days. The IRS doesn't really have a say in Drivers Licenses.

And no, I don't expect to ever be charged with failing to get a license within the time period. It would be difficult for them to know how long I've been in any particular place. But it is an interesting problem that the States apparently aren't willing to consider.

 

[gdcleanfun]

The way the laws are written, it really doesn't make any difference where your tax home is (which for state tax I believe can be split between states). They say if you are in Kalifornia for 10 days or more (living there I suppose not vacationing which is what I would be doing though that's apparently not the way the law is written) you have to get a license. Basically the same for Idaho except it is 60 days. The IRS doesn't really have a say in Drivers Licenses.

And no, I don't expect to ever be charged with failing to get a license within the time period. It would be difficult for them to know how long I've been in any particular place. But it is an interesting problem that the States apparently aren't willing to consider.

I know that the IRS doesn't have any say, I was just looking for a reference for you. Sounds like the states are being "hard headed." Yet, IDK for sure but isn't it illegal to possess 2 licenses? I've never been stopped but if I was I'd always though that I, too, would say something to that effect, "I'm on an extended vacation." I wonder if that would make an LEO or the state happy.

 

[FN1910]

There are thousands of people with this same deal that live up North but have Winter homes in Florida. The 10 day deal applies to you becoming a resident which normally means "permanent" resident. If you have homes in both locations you choose one to be your permanent resident, normally the one you spend the most time at. I ran into the same thing several years ago when I was working temporaly in a diferent state.

Key on these factors.
Do you still own the other home
Do you still have the utilities turned on
Does anyone live in the other home
Do you regularly go to the other home
Do you still receive mail at the other address
Where is your car insurance listed as primary address
Where do you vote
Where do you put down as your primary residence for IRS and state taxes (if any)
Where are your car tags listed

All these things are important and if you have homes in CA and ID but move from one to the other you have to choose one to be your permanent address. Just like the "Snowbirds" that move from NJ to FL every winter you don't have to get a FL license if you don't intend to be there for most of the year.

 

[wuzfuz]

Pulled over

Someone brought up searching a vehicle requiring a search warrant. Not necessarily. There exists in the law what are referred to as exigent circumstances, variations which allow searches to be made when obtaining a search warrant would be counter-productive. One of these is an undeclared weapon in a vehicle. The vehicle being mobile and thus difficult to legally immobilize, is an exigent circumstance. If someone states they have a gun under the seat, then the officer sees the grip of a weapon sticking out from under the driver's thigh, this gives reasonable cause for a search of the vehicle to locate and identify any further weapons or evidence of a crime. An officer does not enjoy searching a vehicle on the roadside, but sometimes it can't be avoided. In this case, the driver and weapons checked out and he was sent on his way, with no more than a small amount of time taken. But what if you make a stop such as I did once, where the grip of a gun was visible between the seat and the console? I drew my weapon and ordered the driver out of the vehicle, handcuffed him and had him sit on the curb while I checked the car. The weapon whose grip was visible came back on NCIC as having been stolen in a burglary two years before. In the glove box, I found a double barrel 12 gauge shotgun cut down to pistol size. I advised the driver he was under arrest on the weapons, called for a wrecker and took him to the jail. He stated he had biught the .38 spl revolver for $175 from a guy at a bar. Since it was a reasonable price, I did not charge him with possession, but let him know the weapon would be returned to the owner. He was charged with possession of a prohibited weapon.

 

[guadman]

I've had only one experience. Was pulled over in my own town just for taking a sharp left turn near my house faster then the LEO thought I should have. Here in Oregon you don't have to inform officers if you are legally carrying. It was the first time I had been stopped since I got my CCW permit and I honestly just didn't think of informing the officer - wasn't trying to hide anything. After he came back he asked me if I had a concealed weapon - turns out it's right in your driver's license info when he punches it up. I really was embarrassed that I hadn't thought to tell him. He just smiled at me and said "don't worry I just wanted to make sure you weren't driving drunk or anything like that", handed me back my license and let me go. As far as guns in the glove compartment, I keep my .22 S&W 317 in there all the time, just in case something ever happens when I am driving and I didn't think to carry that day or I simply need it. There have been a number of occassions when I just took a quick ride to the local 7-11 etc. and didn't think to put my carry gun in my pocket, always makes me secure to remember there is still a weapon in my glove compartment.

 

[ecgoin]

I handed her my license, informed her that I had a handgun in the glove box, and asked if she would prefer to retrieve it.

Do we really have to inform LE that we have a weapon, or is it just nice etiquit? I have not seen anything in CO about a need to inform.