Waterford PD Still Confused About transport

I spoke with a Waterford Officer today about a barking dog, and the conversation went from the dog to my M1A magazine lying on my front seat. He asked if I had a gun in the car, pointing out the mag, and I confirmed saying that I had been shooting a couple days prior, and the gun was in the trunk. He didn't search or ask to see it, but asked about if I were transporting properly. I explained very breifly that it needed to be unloaded and cased, taken down, or in the trunk. He said he thought that I was supposed to be en route to or from a range, store, and so on. I said that I think he was referring to 231a, and the list of places you could go, but that it was not an all inclusive list, and that I was somewhat familliar with the law. I was holding my cards close. He referenced the empty holster mounted faithfully on my E-brake, I said that I used to have a CPL. He seemed satisfied, and Didn't pursue it any further.

All in all it was a good exchange which I had initiated, seeing him and another officer on foot on a side street chatting between themselves.

stainless1911 said:

I spoke with a Waterford Officer today about a barking dog, and the conversation went from the dog to my M1A magazine lying on my front seat. He asked if I had a gun in the car, pointing out the mag, and I confirmed saying that I had been shooting a couple days prior, and the gun was in the trunk. He didn't search or ask to see it, but asked about if I were transporting properly. I explained very breifly that it needed to be unloaded and cased, taken down, or in the trunk. He said he thought that I was supposed to be en route to or from a range, store, and so on. I said that I think he was referring to 231a, and the list of places you could go, but that it was not an all inclusive list, and that I was somewhat familliar with the law. I was holding my cards close. He referenced the empty holster mounted faithfully on my E-brake, I said that I used to have a CPL. He seemed satisfied, and Didn't pursue it any further.

All in all it was a good exchange which I had initiated, seeing him and another officer on foot on a side street chatting between themselves.

Click to expand...

Neil, for god's sake you talk too much. Nothing to stop this officer from checking things out and the prosecutor thinks it's illegal and charging you. They have nothing to lose and you have a lot to lose. DON'T TALK TO POLICE.

stainless1911 said:

I spoke with a Waterford Officer today about a barking dog, and the conversation went from the dog to my M1A magazine lying on my front seat. He asked if I had a gun in the car, pointing out the mag, and I confirmed saying that I had been shooting a couple days prior, and the gun was in the trunk. He didn't search or ask to see it, but asked about if I were transporting properly. I explained very breifly that it needed to be unloaded and cased, taken down, or in the trunk. He said he thought that I was supposed to be en route to or from a range, store, and so on. I said that I think he was referring to 231a, and the list of places you could go, but that it was not an all inclusive list, and that I was somewhat familliar with the law. I was holding my cards close. He referenced the empty holster mounted faithfully on my E-brake, I said that I used to have a CPL. He seemed satisfied, and Didn't pursue it any further.

All in all it was a good exchange which I had initiated, seeing him and another officer on foot on a side street chatting between themselves.

Click to expand...

Stainless, why do you:
1. talk to the police? They are not your friends. The authorities have activly sought to harass you as much as legally possible, and yet you decide to talk to them??

2. keep a holster on your e-brake? Why would you keep a magazine lying in plain view on the seat? What you are doing is handing the officer(s) RAS that a crime is "afoot", and also providing possible Probable Cause if he can find a few more "implausabilities". If the officer argues that most people wouldn't keep a holster mounted in their car unless they were using it to carry a firearm... I don't think it would take much for an officer to justify a search as most people don't mount a holster in their car unless they carry a firearm in there. Your statement to him that you used to have a cpl tells him that you have had it taken away. In his mind, you are now a criminal. So, you drive around with a holster attached to the inside of your automobile and, since they can only be transported in the trunk, etc, the question is WHY would you have a holster there...perhaps you quicky threw it under the seat as the officer approached?? I can't think of any sane judge that would not allow this in RAS and in development of Probable Cause...

It really is just a matter of time before he's in jail.

He talks to the police because he wants them on his side in the future...and they LOVE him for it. Keep talking...it's worked out SOOO well for you already.

I was carrying legally.

The holster is a form of protest.

Venator said:

Neil, for god's sake you talk too much. Nothing to stop this officer from checking things out and the prosecutor thinks it's illegal and charging you. They have nothing to lose and you have a lot to lose. DON'T TALK TO POLICE.

Click to expand...

Waaay to much. I don't even try to teach LEOs the laws ... first, they don't care and 2nd, they don't listen and 3rd, they're to stupid to understand.

I wasnt trying to teach him anything, I pretended to only have an idea of what I was talking about.

Turns out, the gun wasn't even in the car like I thought it was.

stainless1911 said:

I was carrying legally.

The holster is a form of protest.

Click to expand...

I understand your desire to "protest" and yes, according to what you wrote, you were legal. However, I think I know you well enough to see that your argument is plausible.

But the court is going to base its decision on testimony and facts as they appear to people who don't understand any other reason you have ammo at hand, along with a mounted holster, unless your desire is to have a pistol in your passenger compartment. As we have seen time and time again, many "facts" are interpreted in a light favoring the prosecutor. The way things appear has been the cornerstone of every legal issue you have had to deal with since you began posting on ocdo. Why provide fodder to charge you with a crime?

I have read through probably hundreds of ccw cases. In many of these, rather than being charged with ccw, they are instead charged with ATTEMPTED ccw, which really means that there may not be enough surety to successfully argue ccw at the time the officer stopped you, but the person most likely did ccw out of the officer's presence. Why give them an argument? In their minds, the only reason you would have a holster mounted in your car, with ammo at the ready, is because you carry in your car. With these facts established, how hard is it to see that a judge could find you guilty?

Were I you, I would try to ensure that my time in which I am unable to get a cpl is kept as short as possible. I would remove any possibility that an officer could infer that I have carried contrary to the law. No mounted holster in my car...no ammo, loose or in a magazine, in my passenger compartment. And, I would hopefully never engage in idle chatter with a LEO.

I place this post here not only addressed to you specifically, but to anyone without a CPL. Don't let them construct a plausible argument that you have committed a felony. This would preclude you from ever being able to possess a firearm ever again.

Not to argue, but trhe ammo was for a rifle.

It is my understanding that in a criminal case that the burden of proof is on the state to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt, that you had committed a crime. Wouldn't they then have to prove that a person was carrying ccw?

stainless1911 said:

Not to argue, but trhe ammo was for a rifle.

It is my understanding that in a criminal case that the burden of proof is on the state to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt, that you had committed a crime. Wouldn't they then have to prove that a person was carrying ccw?

Click to expand...

Google Michigan Supreme Court opinions, choose search under case type, party name, etc, then put "ccw" in the case type search. You will find the answer to your question.

I recall one case where ammo in the passenger compartment was a deciding factor where the pistol was never found.

Let me add that your goal should be to stay out of court, not winning cases. Think of the money you may save.

DrTodd said:

Let me add that your goal should be to stay out of court, not winning cases. Think of the money you may save.

Click to expand...

Better yet, stainless' goal should be getting off the LEO's radar, and not being chatty, trying to make friends with LEO's and little girls.

On my trip though NY recently to get to NH, not only did I lock my unloaded guns in a small vault in the trunk and take the ammo Out of the magazine and put the ammo in another unloaded box (and the magazine in the box with the gun), I searched my passenger compartment for gun paraphernalia. I saw the bolster on my driveshaft hump, and removed it (velcro). Why? Didn't want to give NY cops RAS.

The wife and I agreed, if pulled over: don't ask/don't tell, and hell no, you may not search.

Neal, I never want to see you telling anyone to "not talk to the police" again. This is your second time in as many months. If I see you offering this advise, I will reinforce it, but call you out as a hypocrite.

ETA: this thread more aptly named: Stainless still confused about not talking to cops.

scot623 said:

Better yet, stainless' goal should be getting off the LEO's radar, and not being chatty, trying to make friends with LEO's and little girls.

Click to expand...

Regardless of who were talking about, I think its a little crossing the line to say "stop making friends with little girls" like someone is a sexual predator. I'm sure most of you adults here have neighbors with small children whom you are nice to and some of you might even watch while their parents are out of the house. So lets remain mature shall we.

Although I'm starting to believe that's too much to ask for some of you.

Yance said:

Regardless of who were talking about, I think its a little crossing the line to say "stop making friends with little girls" like someone is a sexual predator. I'm sure most of you adults here have neighbors with small children whom you are nice to and some of you might even watch while their parents are out of the house. So lets remain mature shall we.

Although I'm starting to believe that's too much to ask for some of you.

Click to expand...

Agree 100%.

In a discussion about RAS/PC and talking to the police, inserting a not-so-subtle insinuation does not lend anything to the discussion. Although I think the intent is what could be termed "biting humor", what this really does is tell me more about the person making the statement than the person to whom the comment is directed.

TheQ said:

On my trip though NY recently to get to NH, not only did I lock my unloaded guns in a small vault in the trunk and take the ammo Out of the magazine and put the ammo in another unloaded box (and the magazine in the box with the gun), I searched my passenger compartment for gun paraphernalia. I saw the bolster on my driveshaft hump, and removed it (velcro). Why? Didn't want to give NY cops RAS.

The wife and I agreed, if pulled over: don't ask/don't tell, and hell no, you may not search.

Click to expand...

Very good example what I was talking about. Reduce the possibility that, instead of enjoying a nice vacation, you spend time and energy trying to find a bond agent to get you out of jail.

Really, where is that damned popcorn eating icon. It would be so handy.

DrTodd said:

I prefer this:

View attachment 8676

Click to expand...

LOL, that's good. I like it. But the icon just eliminates any misconception.