Pulled over


AussieRogue

New member
Well guys and girls I was pulled over for speeding tonight was going about 48 MPH in a 35 MPH zones. I did what I have read here and on other sites pulled to the side of the road opened my window turn on the interior light and turned the car off. The officer walk to my car and asked if i new why I was pulled over I answered I either did not changed lane properly or was speeding well it happens i was speeding.

When the officer asked for my drivers lic I informed the officer that I was armed she asked me to put my weapon on the seat next to me and to get out of the car and then asked If i had been pulled over for speeding before I answered no. Now here is the part where I know that a lot of you will say that I did wrong but I do not think I did she then asked If she could run my weapon to see if it was stolen and I said no I then returned to the car and waited the officer returned after a couple of minutes and gave me a warning about speeding. OK sorry about being a bit long winded but thought you would like to know
 

bob16066

New member
I will never consent to a search. For no other reason than I don't have to.

Think it through: if they have to ask; then they don't have "probable cause." I'll bet a dollar that if they think they have "probable cause" they'll just Order me out of the car at gunpoint and start his search. I've seen it on "Cops" a billion times.

I do believe in treating the lawperson with respect; and it's beyond my comprehension why they wouldn't treat me with respect and honor my wishes not to consent; which is my right.

The trick is to be meek and humble and honest.
 

Treo

Bullet Proof
I think you were wrong as soon as you started answering questions.


I answered I either did not changed lane properly or was speeding well it happens i was speeding.


What you actually did here was confess to a crime.


When the officer asked for my drivers lic I informed the officer that I was armed

You blew it here as well, New Mexico has no duty to inform, had you kept your mouth shut you never would have had to deal w/ her wanting to run your weapon.

But hey, that's me

YMMV
 

rocketboy

New member
I think you were wrong as soon as you started answering questions.


I answered I either did not changed lane properly or was speeding well it happens i was speeding.


What you actually did here was confess to a crime.


When the officer asked for my drivers lic I informed the officer that I was armed

You blew it here as well, New Mexico has no duty to inform, had you kept your mouth shut you never would have had to deal w/ her wanting to run your weapon.

But hey, that's me

YMMV

Presuming that the car is registered to the same person who has a CC licence then the LEO knows before they get to the car that someone has a CC licence and so there is a school of thought that simply letting them know shows them that your willing to be honest and forthcoming. The point is by telling them your CCing, you not telling them something they don't already know.

I'd never verbalize that "I'm armed" the way the OP did. Good way to make a LEO nervous, and/or get tazed, pepper sprayed, or shot. I would simply hand them my CHL (in OR it's a CHL) and only confirm that I was CCing if they asked.

Oh, and laws very by state but here in OR you are required to let an officer inspect your weapon if they ask. NOw, the LEO in question did not ask to inspect his weapon, rather to run it, so I think he was ok in that regard but you should be careful and ask for clarification if a request is not completely clear.
 

SPXD9

Keith
Presuming that the car is registered to the same person who has a CC licence then the LEO knows before they get to the car that someone has a CC licence and so there is a school of thought that simply letting them know shows them that your willing to be honest and forthcoming. The point is by telling them your CCing, you not telling them something they don't already know.

I'd never verbalize that "I'm armed" the way the OP did. Good way to make a LEO nervous, and/or get tazed, pepper sprayed, or shot. I would simply hand them my CHL (in OR it's a CHL) and only confirm that I was CCing if they asked.

Oh, and laws very by state but here in OR you are required to let an officer inspect your weapon if they ask. NOw, the LEO in question did not ask to inspect his weapon, rather to run it, so I think he was ok in that regard but you should be careful and ask for clarification if a request is not completely clear.


I am also from OR and agree with you 100% !
 

medic72

MOLON LABE
Personally, I feel you did the "right" thing. But just don't be a "butt-head" so to speak lol. Also the officer needs probable cause for the search, which "speeding" alone is not. Its weird here we have constitutional rights against unreasonable search/ seizure w/o warrant, and American are still concerned about giving in to commands from Jack booted thugs (some).... At lease she didn't freak out on you lol "SIR on the ground now! Assume a position that is degrading, and grovel to my authority!" Lmao
 

AussieRogue

New member
Just an add on I do not have a CCW I open carry as seeing that I live in NM who do not give CCW to a non US citizen. So seeing that when I had to get my wallet to get my lic the Officer would have seen my weapon so I just did the right thing and told her about it
 

Treo

Bullet Proof
Just an add on I do not have a CCW I open carry as seeing that I live in NM who do not give CCW to a non US citizen. So seeing that when I had to get my wallet to get my lic the Officer would have seen my weapon so I just did the right thing and told her about it

Now that is completely different. If I would be sticking my hand anywhere near an openly displayed handgun I'd inform too.

Originally posted by Rocketboy Presuming that the car is registered to the same person who has a CC licence then the LEO knows before they get to the car that someone has a CC licence

Doesn't apply every where in the US

According to Link Removed Orgeon does not have a "duty to inform'
 

BlackieChan

New member
I agree with Treo with regards to how to handle a traffic stop. Most of us don't get much practice :sarcastic: but it is best to start with "what seems to be the problem officer" which is more coy but equivalent to pleading the fifth, your right to not incriminate yourself.

Other than that it does sound like all things went about as well as they could have. Good job, I hope I never get pulled over again.
 

NavyLCDR

New member
Now here is the part where I know that a lot of you will say that I did wrong but I do not think I did she then asked If she could run my weapon to see if it was stolen and I said no

Only those people who have no concern for their rights would say you did the wrong thing. The officer had absolutely no suspicion that your gun was stolen and had absolutely no reason to check the serial number.

I have to stand up and applaud the officer's handling of the situation, some would have seized the gun "for officer safety" and ran the serial number anyway, an action clearly against the 4th amendment.
 

S&W645

NRA Life Member
Only those people who have no concern for their rights would say you did the wrong thing. The officer had absolutely no suspicion that your gun was stolen and had absolutely no reason to check the serial number.

I have to stand up and applaud the officer's handling of the situation, some would have seized the gun "for officer safety" and ran the serial number anyway, an action clearly against the 4th amendment.

That's why we don't have to say we even have one unless asked directly. But if we do, they do have the right to remove it and check it.
 

NavyLCDR

New member
That's why we don't have to say we even have one unless asked directly. But if we do, they do have the right to remove it and check it.

They have the right to temporarily seize the gun for officer safety. What does that have to do with running the serial number to see if it is stolen? The search and seizure is supposed to be limited in scope to officer safety only, not a search for further evidence of a crime for which no reasonable suspicion exists.
 

G50AE

Well-known member
They have the right to temporarily seize the gun for officer safety. What does that have to do with running the serial number to see if it is stolen? The search and seizure is supposed to be limited in scope to officer safety only, not a search for further evidence of a crime for which no reasonable suspicion exists.

That's why you shouldn't have the serial number of your carry piece etched into the back of your CCW Badge.
 

rocketboy

New member
Now that is completely different. If I would be sticking my hand anywhere near an openly displayed handgun I'd inform too.



Doesn't apply every where in the US

According to Link Removed Orgeon does not have a "duty to inform'

I should have been more specific when I said that the LEO knows before he gets to your car based on car registration... Oh and before anyone gripes about it let me explain:

I have a CHL in OR and my car is registered under my name. A LEO will typically (not always) run a plate before they get out of their car and pull up the registered owner, etc. They will often run the registered owner as well. If you have a CHL, it will show.

Now, in OR there is not duty to inform, I never said there was and would prefer it if my comments were not taken out of context but that's the internet for you. Anyway...

What I was saying is that in a lot of cases (not all, varies by state, etc.) the LEO may already be aware that at least the registered owner of a car has a CHL.

By supplying your CHL, with your drivers licence your, in my opinion putting yourself in a better position...
 

Beau

I was never here.
By supplying your CHL, with your drivers licence your, in my opinion putting yourself in a better position...

A better position for what exactly?

I'm betting our ideas of what you would be putting yourself in a better postition for are quite different. ;)
 

rocketboy

New member
A better position for what exactly?

I'm betting our ideas of what you would be putting yourself in a better postition for are quite different. ;)

Showing the officer (who may already be assuming that your CCing based one the SOP when pulling a car over and running reg.) that your upfront, have noting to hide, etc.

I'm not saying that the OP should have let the LEO run his gun, far from it. I'm not saying that the OP should have listed off infractions that he thought he did to deserve getting pulled over...

What I am saying is that being at least a little upfront puts the LEO at ease and may go a long way to benefit you (the person getting pulled over). Many stories out there of people who got stopped, showed there CHL with their licence and only received a warning when they knew they deserved a ticket. I'm not saying that it's a get out of ticket card, or that you should think of it that way but who can afford a ticket? If you have a chance of avoiding it why not?

I've also talked to may LEOs, from CA and OR that have told me that no matter what they always appreciate it when the driver volunteers their CHL. Make of that what I'm sure you will.

Also, LEOs don't necessarily know the law. A family member was pulled over and did not give the LEO his CHL and the LEO gave him a bad time about it because the LEO thought he was required to. I'd rather not get into a road-side argument with a LEO... so I just show it.

In the end it's a personal preference. Follow the law, do what you think it right for you.

Listen, I'm the biggest privacy advocate there is. Right now OR is fighting to protect the privacy of CHL holders by passing legislation that will make the info non-public and require a court order to get. I've been writing e-mails left and right to get this legislation passed. In this case though, and again it varies by state, "The Man" already knows. I pick my battles. If I get pulled over, I want to do everything I can to let the LEO know that I'm a good guy.

I see no reason to not let the LEO know by handing them your CHL with your licence. Of course I'd only tell them I was CCing (or not) if they asked.
 

ct1911guy

New member
Suprised

I'm surprised the officer wanted you to place the gun on the seat next to you. If i were the cop i wouldnt want you touching your gun.
 

verge

New member
A better position for what exactly?

I'm betting our ideas of what you would be putting yourself in a better postition for are quite different. ;)

In Texas the law requires that you had over BOTH your CHL and your ID / DL if asked for identification. I personally do not see that as intrusive.

Although, if we were to be absolutely constitutional about it we should not need a license to carry at all, concealed or otherwise. We are pushing our legislature that way but it is a long and slow process.
 
J

JSDinTexas

Guest
I'm surprised the officer wanted you to place the gun on the seat next to you. If i were the cop i wouldnt want you touching your gun.

I agree. My first thought was if this were a BG she had encountered, it would have been the chance to blow her away. Very bad technique on her part in my opinion. And asking to run it? And giving a warning? New on the job I bet.
 

New Threads

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,624
Messages
626,928
Members
74,753
Latest member
russvb
Top