• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Connecticut Carry: How to handle a traffic stop

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
The purpose of the 2nd amendment is to protect yourself from the government. In a traffic stop, there it is - the government, right in your face !

And they want to disarm you and take your gun away ... if you comply then you might as well just take all your guns to the police department and hand them over to 'em.

If the government wants to start disarming people, then all they need to do is start pulling folks over for a tail-light out and start taking the easy pickings...they know you have a gun...they know you carry. They will just get a list together and start collecting them on the side of the road.


If you know 20 people who carry and 19 had their guns taken away as "evidence" during a tail light stop and you are being pulled over and the cop asks you for your gun, what you gonna do?

And if you are the first instead of the 20th?

A way to avoid this is to carry 2 guns instead of one. Give the cop one and when he wants to keep it for a bogus reason then you can obtain it back from the thief.

All laws regarding the taking of a citizens sidearm are unconstitutional, no matter what any government official has said.
 

GrandZJ

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
31
Location
Wolcott, CT
The cop has no lawful authority to know where I keep my firearm nor does he have the authority to seize it. If he chooses to seize it for "officer safety" then he will be explaining/justifying that seizure to a judge in the context of a traffic stop.

If a cop wants your firearm, if he knows you are armed, he has to seize you, search you or your vehicle, and then seize your property. I choose to force the cop to make those decisions and then be required to explain/justify his actions to a judge.

How well would that would go here in CT? I'm sure if you refused to tell a cop where your gun is on your person and refuse to let him disarm you for "officer's safety", you'll become acquainted with some cell bars.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
How well would that would go here in CT? I'm sure if you refused to tell a cop where your gun is on your person and refuse to let him disarm you for "officer's safety", you'll become acquainted with some cell bars.
Where did I state that I would refuse to be disarmed? Not that big of a deal, really, but we must defend our rights by forcing the cop to make affirmative actions that he will be held accountable for when he 'gets it wrong'. Cops typically don't resort to the seizure around here, they are fairly well educated on the law.
 

Motofixxer

Regular Member
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
965
Location
Somewhere over the Rainbow
While these aren't state specific they do apply in most cases. Maybe it will help clear up some confusion.

RAS(Reasonable Articulated Suspicion, Detentions and Arrests)

Officers were educated on ID'ing, were polite and professional and admitted they were wrong on video

Detentions and Arrests, info and definitions by cowboyridn

Detention descriptions, consensual and when to walk away. An informational read

3 Different levels of Police/Citizen encounters Explained

4th and 5th Amendment Resources by user Citizen

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1027378.html
The only fact that saves the officer's stop of DeBerry, in my opinion, is the fact that it is unlawful in Illinois to carry a concealed weapon.
The tipster informed the police that DeBerry was armed, and it appears from the facts before us that the weapon was not in plain view.
I do not agree that this case would necessarily come out the same way if Illinois law, like the law of many states, authorized the carrying of concealed weapons.
At that point, the entire content of the anonymous tip would be a physical description of the individual, his location, and an allegation that he was carrying something lawful (a cellular telephone? a beeper? a firearm?).
This kind of nonincriminatory allegation, in my view, would not be enough to justify the kind of investigatory stop that took place here.

This section authorizes officers to demand identification only when a person is suspected of committing a crime, but does not govern the lawfulness of requests for identification in other circumstances. State v. Griffith, 2000 WI 72, 236 Wis. 2d 48, 613 N.W.2d 72, 98-0931.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1226046509410140751&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr
52 F.3d 194 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Coye Denise GREEN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-1675. United States Court of App

Regalado v. State, 25 So. 3d 600 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 4th Dist. 2009
"Despite the obvious potential danger to officers and the public by a person in possession of a concealed gun in a crowd, this is not illegal in Florida unless the person does not have a concealed weapons permit, a fact that an officer cannot glean by mere observation. Based upon our understanding of both Florida and United States Supreme Court precedent, stopping a person solely on the ground that the individual possesses a gun violates the Fourth Amendment."


In evaluating the validity of investigatory stops, we must consider the "totality of the circumstances--the whole picture." United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 8, 109 S.Ct. 1581, 1585, 104 L.Ed.2d 1 (1989) (quoting United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411, 417, 101 S.Ct. 690, 695, 66 L.Ed.2d 621 (1981)). Reasonable suspicion must derive from more than an "inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or 'hunch.' " Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 27, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1883, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). Moreover, "[c]onduct typical of a broad category of innocent people provides a weak basis for suspicion." United States v. Weaver, 966 F.2d 391, 394 (8th Cir.) (quoting United States v. Crawford, 891 F.2d 680, 681 (8th Cir.1989)), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. 829, 121 L.Ed.2d 699 (1992).

A number of the factors relied upon by Carrill can be characterized as "conduct typical of a broad category of innocent people." Weaver, 966 F.2d at 394. We reject the notion that Green's travelling alone, carrying a small bag, wearing new and baggy clothes, and failing to make eye contact with Carrill, are in any way indicative of criminal activity. Thus, these factors cannot play a role in assessing the validity of the investigatory stop.

Under Florida v. J.L., an anonymous tip giving rise to reasonable suspicion must bear indicia of reliability. That the tipster's anonymity is placed at risk indicates that the informant is genuinely concerned and not a fallacious prankster. Corroborated aspects of the tip also lend credibility; the corroborated actions of the suspect need be inherently criminal in and of themselves., 2001 WI 21, 241 Wis. 2d 631, 623 N.W.2d 106, 96-1821. State v. Williams

“Mr. St. John’s lawful possession of a loaded firearm in a crowded place could not, by itself, create a reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify an investigatory detention.” St. John v. McColley

The Tenth Circuit found that an investigatory detention initiated by an officer after he discovered that the defendant lawfully possessed a loaded firearm lacked sufficient basis because the firearm alone did not create a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
United States v. King (1993)

“The mere presence of firearms does not create exigent circumstances.” WI v. Kiekhefer (1997)

An anonymous tip is not RAS

ID'ing yourself discussion


And some useful vid links


How to Remain silent when questioned by Police

UN Plans to destroy all non military firearms

Respect and Check your Firearm Infamous DEA agent shoots his foot while giving speech about Gun Safety

Don't Talk to Cops (PLEASE WATCH, Important for any and all Law Enforcement Encounters)

Example how to exercise your Rights

How to refuse a Police Search

How to keep Police from Searching

The RIGHT Way to handle a Police Stop

The WRONG Way to handle a Police Stop

Traffic Stops: Know your RIGHTS EP.4

Surviving Police Encounters

How to Act if You're Stopped by the Police
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Last edited:
Top