Relinquishing Your Sidearm To LEO's At Minor Traffic Stops.

[NavyLCDR]

Here's the deal in reality....

If a police officer has detained you for a proper reason, and he/she knows that you have a gun and he/she wants to disarm you for the duration of the stop, they will. And it will be on their terms. That's reality. Disagree with the officer too much or too long and you will find yourself disagreeing with the officer while you are in handcuffs and he/she is taking the gun away from you.

And the US Supreme Court has ruled the officer is within his/her rights to do so, whether or not we agree with it.

 

[Bernie Lomax]

Just a wee bit racist and NOT very High Road...You are suggesting "minorities" and are not as smart as "non-minorities". That train of thougt should have gone the way of Jim Crow laws....

James Watson disagrees.

 

[winchester1886]

I agree 100% with NavyLT as a former LEO I would also run a stolen check on the weapon before giving it back.

 

[Rocketmedic]

Here on Ft. Bliss, I just saw one of our MPs rolling around with an M9 that was definately on fire. In a crappy holster with horrific retention that relied on an (undone) snap to hold in the pistol. It's not too hard to imagine a negligent discharge from that.

I really think that police should be forced to learn far, far more about firearms than they currently do, both military and civilian.

 

[HorseSoldier]

The M9 is meant to be carried decocked and on fire. Hence the double action thing. (Or at least that's how we did it when I was assigned to the cool kids . . .) The powers that be in Big Army like to assume Joe is too infantile to safely manage this, but it would be reprehensible to hold MPs functioning in a LEO role to the same hang ups and dumbness generations of Sergeants Major and underemployed officers inflict on line guys.

 

[Tomcat47]

I have been pulled in NC, SC, and VA. and upon telling them I had a legal firearm they just ask me for license and registration and then to step out of vehicle!

In VA. I was asked to come to the cruiser and sat in front seat? Got my warning ticket and was wished happy travels!

_________________________________________________________________
"Danger is often an illusion created in our minds, but when danger becomes a reality it must be met head on." -Willie Nelson

 

[marv]

We Hoosiers are not required to inform. If asked I would say " It is in my pocket in a holster with the trigger covered. It is double action only. I can bring it out of my pocket in the holster and hand it to you." If he had an alternative plan I am sure he would tell me.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I agree 100% with NavyLT as a former LEO I would also run a stolen check on the weapon before giving it back.

So you seize a firearm "for officer safety" only, you have no RAS to indicate the firearm might be stolen..... I guess it's OK with you to violate the 4th Amendment and conduct a search for evidence of a crime not related to the initial stop, not related to the purpose of the seizure of the firearm, and with no RAS of a crime involving a stolen firearm?

 

[84B20]

My solution, if ever stopped and asked by a LEO for my weapon is to remove my Blackhawk Serpa paddle holster (no plug intended) with firearm in it. It is relatively easy to twist and lift it off of my belt and the gun stays safely locked in. That seems to be the best solution I can come up with, at least for me.

 

[Guillermo]

I would also run a stolen check on the weapon before giving it back.

Do you keep really crisp creases in your brownshirt?

 

[Guillermo]

In AZ we are NOT required to inform, but the officer MAY ask, and then we MUST inform upon request. At this time the officer MAY take temporary custody during the lawful contact.

in a car that is the effective law in Texas.

By the letter of the law you have to inform a policeman during a traffic stop that you are armed, BUT there is no longer a penalty if you don't.

We have silly laws here. Like churches are "prohibited" but must post 30.06 signs.

Not in a car, if you are legally required to produce a license you are legally required to present your CCL.

 

[Flintknapper]

danprkr wrote:

In TX it doesn't matter whether you think it's safe or not. Or even whether it's safe or not. It's strictly at the LEO's discretion.

Nope!

The officer must be able to articulate why He/She "reasonably" believed it was necessary. It is not (wholesale)... up to their discretion.
----------------------------------------------------------------

§ 411.207. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICER TO DISARM. (a) A
peace officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's
official duties may disarm a license holder at any time the officer reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the
license holder, officer, or another individual. The peace officer
shall return the handgun to the license holder before discharging
the license holder from the scene if the officer determines that the
license holder is not a threat to the officer, license holder, or
another individual and if the license holder has not violated any
provision of this subchapter or committed any other violation that
results in the arrest of the license holder.


-----------------------------------------------------------

If you are asked you MUST surrender the weapon for the duration of the stop

Correct. The time and place to contest the request/disarmament is NOT on the street.

 

[Flintknapper]

Guillermo wrote:

By the letter of the law you have to inform a policeman during a traffic stop that you are armed, BUT there is no longer a penalty if you don't.

Traffic stop has nothing to do with it. ANYTIME a CHL is required to produce a drivers license/ID.....AND you are presently armed, you must also produce your CHL. Although...failure to do so...no longer has a penalty. Under the Motorist Protection Act....(non-CHL), you need say nothing.

We have silly laws here. Like churches are "prohibited" but must post 30.06 signs.

I don't know if thats "silly", but it is correct.

Not in a car, if you are legally required to produce a license you are legally required to present your CCL.

If carrying under authority of a CHL you are only required to present your CHL ...IF you are armed.

 

[winchester1886]

Checking a weapon to see if it is a stolen weapon is not a violation of our 4th Amendment rights. I also would run a license check on subject and Vehicle also if any warrants were issued for subject.

I find it hard to believe that on a traffic stop that people don't know that the LEO checks the registration on your vehicle,and your Drivers license.They check your tags to see if they are displayed on the right vehicle,current registration,also your driving record,any outstanding warrants,and criminal history if needed.Now that being said why would the LEO not run a check on a weapon.It could be stolen just because you have a CHL doesn't change anything.

 

[HorseSoldier]

My solution, if ever stopped and asked by a LEO for my weapon is to remove my Blackhawk Serpa paddle holster (no plug intended) with firearm in it. It is relatively easy to twist and lift it off of my belt and the gun stays safely locked in. That seems to be the best solution I can come up with, at least for me.

An attempt to provide an officer a weapon packaged in such a manner as to suggest an attempt to obscure the serial number would tend to definitely get the S/N run by most anyone. (Providing reasonable suspicion something was amiss, since that's not how 99.9% of people do it, etc.)

And you're most likely going to still get your weapon unloaded and returned to you in a different manner than you handed it off in the first place. Even nice officers tend to frown on people who're trying to play games.

Checking a weapon to see if it is a stolen weapon is not a violation of our 4th Amendment rights. I also would run a license check on subject and Vehicle also if any warrants were issued for subject.

As mentioned in this thread or some other thread (I can't remember since they all see to run together these days) I don't know of any case law at all that challenges the right of officers to run serial numbers on guns (or anything else with a serial number in plain view, even if the plain view aspect is situational -- i.e. they can only see it because you handed it to them, even if compelled to by law). There might be an interesting point of debate there if a test case ever finds its way up through the courts, but as it stands right now the courts do not regard running a S/N on a gun to be a 4th Amendment violation.

 

[BLB68]

IF the subject comes up during a traffic stop, the officer is already concerned about his "safety." Since the officer is already concerned about his "safety," do you REALLY think it is a good idea to put your hand on your gun and remove it from the holster?!?

I think you would greatly increase the chances of a firearm discharge if you did.

If the officer asks you to hand him your weapon, you're going to have to put your hand on it to do so anyway. Nowhere in my post did I say anything about simply reaching for your weapon without speaking to the officer.

Talking to the guy may just help put him at ease, provided you aren't being antagonistic. Whenever I get pulled over, I greet the officer with a smile and a polite greeting, even if I believe I've been pulled over without cause. Being friendly with the guy, and cooperative will save you more grief than being antagonistic.

 

[devoeski]

There are countless videos on liveleaks where officers accidently discharged firearms with injury. And if barney fife shoots himself then what happens? You are screwed tests what happens. And if you try to resist handing it over you are screwed as well. I get a little upset when I'm pulled over for simple traffic and am asked there are drugs or weapons present. I'm a white male driving a nice car in Phoenix Arizona,you are goddam right I carry a weapon. Two in fact. I think police should only be allowed to ask about weapons or seize your weapon with probable cause. Criminals aren't concerned with a law. The criminal who wishes to shoot police isn't going to let him know he has a weapon.

 

[Gromky]

I get a little upset when I'm pulled over for simple traffic and am asked there are drugs or weapons present. I'm a white male driving a nice car in Phoenix Arizona,you are goddam right I carry a weapon. Two in fact. I think police should only be allowed to ask about weapons or seize your weapon with probable cause. Criminals aren't concerned with a law. The criminal who wishes to shoot police isn't going to let him know he has a weapon.

Some of the worst criminals have been a "white male driving a nice car." Do you really want them to assume you're perfectly honest, after stopping you for running a red light or speeding? And the "black male driving a crappy car" who did nothing is obviously going to shoot him.

 

[FC]

Checking a weapon to see if it is a stolen weapon is not a violation of our 4th Amendment rights. I also would run a license check on subject and Vehicle also if any warrants were issued for subject.

So what you are saying is that you would be able to articulate how or when it was or was about to be used in a crime?

I haven't been pulled over with a gun on me but if they wanted to play run the number games I would start digging out everything I could find in my truck with a serial and promptly demand that they run those numbers as well...Cell phone, pocket knife, tools, engine, transfer case, transmission, diffs, etc ANYTHING I could think of in my possession that had a unique serial.

If they didn't want to sit there and run serials with me I would be taking it up with their department and demanding a damn good reason why!

 

[HorseSoldier]

It's fun to idly speculate about how you'd stick it to the officer who's just doing his job and whose conduct in this specific case is of no concern to you unless you're in the habit of carrying stolen weapons -- but "I'd start rummaging around in my vehicle for anything with a serial number on it" is a pretty good way to find yourself in handcuffs in the back of a police car for the duration of your contact with officers.

A lot of the concern here is, I think, the idea that if your S/N gets run it goes into some magical database where the black helicopter QRF instantly has your info logged for when THE DAY rolls around, etc.

I can't speak for every LE agency in the country but that's not how it works in my little corner of real life. There's no list kept of serial numbers and who had them -- hell, when multiple people are in a vehicle there's not even a record of who had a given pistol in their possession at all unless the traffic stop develops into something that requires a report to be written.

Again, mileage may vary elsewhere -- and if it does I find that fairly creepy as well -- but I think a lot of people's alarm on this topic is rooted in ignorance.

 

[FC]

It's fun to idly speculate about how you'd stick it to the officer who's just doing his job

His/her job is to uphold and defend the Constitution, not to violate it at will.

Explain to me why a guns s/n should be run and a phone's shouldn't let alone any other readily visible number on a vehicle, offering stuff up should be considered downright helpful! Last I knew there were more stolen vehicles and electronics in this country than guns by a large margin.

Rationalize all you like but running the number on someone's gun without probable cause violates the 4th and insults the owner as an officer at that point is inferring that the owner is a criminal.

Not running the rest of the available numbers in someone's pockets and vehicle insults my intelligence if I am to believe they are looking to do anything other than disarm me as some kind of a power trip.

 

[grumpy66]

I have a bullet hole in my floorboard from a fumble-fingered "Barney Fife" trying to clear my 1911 during a traffic stop.
He muzzle swept me twice, then pointed it inside my truck, dropped the mag(after looking all over for the mag release) then pulled the trigger.

I did not get a ticket thought.

 

[robert garner]

I asked a simular question on another board

If asked I will gladly hand over my Pocket Navy,If asked I will tell him to unload it it is only necessary to ear the hammer back and hit the bang switch.
So in the interest of Officer safety...does he unload it and hand it back,give it back loaded,or keep it?
I would especially like to hear from LEO's.
robert

 

[Guillermo]

Flintknapper did an excellent job of polishing up my post.

 

[merlinfire]

Mags has an excellent point. If you really thought that the guy was a threat, I would have already pulled my gun, right? Otherwise, do I really want him to reach for his pistol, unless I've already got mine trained on him? I wonder how many LEO have been shot due to this stupidity?