Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Red River Gorge

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917

    Red River Gorge

    I open carried this weekend in Red River Gorge--great weather and a lot of fun. Yesterday, the Wolfe County Sheriff was conducting a traffic stop looking for intoxicated drivers. I let him know that I had a gun on my hip. "Yeah, I know, I see it," was his reply. He looked at my license and registration and then I was on my way. He could have cared less about the firearm and didn't want me to get out of or turn off my vehicle. Although I think traffic stops are unconstitutional, it went as well as it could have.

  2. #2
    Regular Member DrakeZ07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,107
    What was his PC/RAS behind conducting a traffic stop on you? Or was it another road-block that is all to common down there by the Tri-County cops and their Forestry Service overlords?

    Or was his RAS being that anyone traveling on that particular highway is to be considered drunk, and/or driving without a license or insurance until he stops them, and conducts a visual search of your vehicle, while sniffing the air of your car, and demanding your papers while trying to decide if you're an easy target for harrasment?

    Glad you enjoyed the Gorge, Sorry you had to be subjected to the whims of Wolfe's Sheriff dept. Personally I know a couple deputies on that side, as well as Menifee, and Powell; So take heart when I say it could have been worse.
    I'm a proud openly gay open carrier~
    Trained SKYWARN spotter, and veteran Storm Chaser.
    =^.^= ~<3~ =^.^=
    Beware the Pink Camo clad gay redneck.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917
    That's the thing--there was no PC/RAS. That's why I think they're unconstitutional. I believe the courts have ruled otherwise. I think that if they're done to all vehicles, or "ever third", then they can be done. They just can't pick and choose who they want to pull over. Then again, I could be wrong; please educate me if I am.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Flounder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Louisville, Kentucky, United States
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by langzaiguy View Post
    That's the thing--there was no PC/RAS. That's why I think they're unconstitutional. I believe the courts have ruled otherwise. I think that if they're done to all vehicles, or "ever third", then they can be done. They just can't pick and choose who they want to pull over. Then again, I could be wrong; please educate me if I am.
    "The Michigan Supreme Court had found sobriety roadblocks to be a violation of the Fourth Amendment. However, by a 6-3 decision in Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz (1990), the United States Supreme Court found properly conducted sobriety checkpoints to be constitutional. While acknowledging that such checkpoints infringed on a constitutional right, Chief Justice Rehnquist argued the state interest in reducing drunk driving outweighed this minor infringement."

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917
    Thanks for the citation, Flounder--as unfortunate as it is.

  6. #6
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,735
    Michigan State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990)
    It is important to recognize what our inquiry is not about. No allegations are before us of unreasonable treatment of any person after an actual detention at a particular checkpoint. See Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. at 428 U. S. 559 ("claim that a particular exercise of discretion in locating or operating a checkpoint is unreasonable is subject to post-stop judicial review"). As pursued in the lower courts, the instant action challenges only the use of sobriety checkpoints generally. We address only the initial stop of each motorist passing through a checkpoint and the associated preliminary questioning and observation by checkpoint officers. Detention of particular motorists for more extensive field sobriety testing may require satisfaction of an individualized suspicion standard. Id.
    United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976)
    Amendment rights at checkpoints lies in appropriate limitations on the scope of the stop. See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. at 392 U. S. 24-27; United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. at 422 U. S. 881-882. We have held that checkpoint searches are constitutional only if justified by consent or probable cause to search. United States v. Ortiz, 422 U. S. 891 (1975). And our holding today is limited to the type of stops described in this opinion. "[A]ny further detention . . . must be based on consent or probable cause." United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, supra at 422 U. S. 882. None of the defendants in these cases argues that the stopping officers exceeded these limitations. Consequently, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which had affirmed the conviction of Sifuentes. We reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and remand the case with directions to affirm the conviction of Martinez-Fuerte and to remand the other cases to the District Court for further proceedings.
    In other words, you are not obligated to answer questions and not even required to produce a driver license. RAS must be established. And the stop is not RAS.

  7. #7
    Regular Member LEX_XDM40compact's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    LEX, KY
    Posts
    83
    @langzaiguy

    Do you have your Conceal permit? Only reason i mention it is its actually "illegal" to carry on your hip in your car without one. I had a close LEO friend of mine here in Lex confirm that anything thats not in your factory compartment of your vehicle is it considered concealed.


    (others can ofc clarify for me)

  8. #8
    Regular Member DrakeZ07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,107
    Quote Originally Posted by LEX_XDM40compact View Post
    @langzaiguy

    Do you have your Conceal permit? Only reason i mention it is its actually "illegal" to carry on your hip in your car without one. I had a close LEO friend of mine here in Lex confirm that anything thats not in your factory compartment of your vehicle is it considered concealed.


    (others can ofc clarify for me)
    Really now? So a firearm that is on the dashboard, on the seat, on your lap, on a gun-rack, or hanging by a string attached to your roof, is considered concealed solely because it is not in a factory installed compartment? And you listened and took this LEO's word as being law? Would you please explain to me why you took the word of a LEO as being nigh to law? or do you simply believe everything someone in a fancy uniform tells you?

    I encourage you to read over the big stickied post at the top of our sub-forum, that reads as "Kentucky Gun Laws".

    Next time your cop friend tells you what is, or is not illegal, ask them to cite the exact law, or lack thereof, then take the suggested advice/word, and throw it away.
    I'm a proud openly gay open carrier~
    Trained SKYWARN spotter, and veteran Storm Chaser.
    =^.^= ~<3~ =^.^=
    Beware the Pink Camo clad gay redneck.

  9. #9
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    Quote Originally Posted by LEX_XDM40compact View Post
    @langzaiguy

    Do you have your Conceal permit? Only reason i mention it is its actually "illegal" to carry on your hip in your car without one. I had a close LEO friend of mine here in Lex confirm that anything thats not in your factory compartment of your vehicle is it considered concealed.
    Let us think about this for a moment.

    What is the definition of concealed? Is a firearm considered concealed if it is worn on your hip while you're walking? Is a firearm concealed if your vehicle has no storage compartment or no storage compartment large enough to hold the firearm?

    Concealed has to be hidden or attempted to be hidden from view. If it is seen or able to be seen then it is not concealed.
    It is difficult to conceal a long gun, especially a 28'' rifle with a scope and a bipod. Only a trunk could hold a firearm of this size, yet not all vehicles have trunks.

    Edit: I see Drake answered the question better and before I did.

    He is right, do not accept much as fact unless you can verify it. If you are willing to bet you freedom on someone's advice on the law then go for it, if not then research it for yourself.
    Last edited by 09jisaac; 04-06-2013 at 11:52 PM.
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  10. #10
    Regular Member LEX_XDM40compact's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    LEX, KY
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by DrakeZ07 View Post
    Really now? So a firearm that is on the dashboard, on the seat, on your lap, on a gun-rack, or hanging by a string attached to your roof, is considered concealed solely because it is not in a factory installed compartment? And you listened and took this LEO's word as being law? Would you please explain to me why you took the word of a LEO as being nigh to law? or do you simply believe everything someone in a fancy uniform tells you?

    I encourage you to read over the big stickied post at the top of our sub-forum, that reads as "Kentucky Gun Laws".

    Next time your cop friend tells you what is, or is not illegal, ask them to cite the exact law, or lack thereof, then take the suggested advice/word, and throw it away.
    I do take everything A leo tells me with a grain of salt. I never said I believed or thought he was right. I simply replied with what I was told and passed it along for him to note.

    Please dont "encourage" me to read laws lol as i have mentioned here several times im aware of the laws and I was again simply passing along what was told to me.

    Encouraged as the "law" reads in terms of carrying in a car.

    527.020 Carrying Concealed Deadly Weapon.
    (8) A loaded or unloaded firearm or other deadly weapon shall not be deemed concealed on or about the
    person if it is located in any enclosed container, compartment, or storage space [regularly] installed as
    original equipment in a motor vehicle by its manufacturer, including but not limited to a glove
    compartment, center console, or seat pocket, regardless of whether said enclosed container, storage
    space, or compartment is locked, unlocked, or does not have a locking mechanism. No person or
    organization, public or private, shall prohibit a person from keeping a loaded or unloaded firearm or
    ammunition, or both, or other deadly weapon in a vehicle in accordance with the provisions of this
    subsection. Any attempt by a person or organization, public or private, to violate the provisions of this
    subsection may be the subject of an action for appropriate relief or for damages in a Circuit Court or
    District Court of competent jurisdiction. This subsection shall not apply to any person prohibited from
    possessing a firearm pursuant to KRS 527.040.

    You asked for the law there you have it. Please now show me the LAW that says otherwise?

    Now im aware of rack mounting a rifle or shotgun to the rear windshield to your truck. However like I mentioned to him originally was a simple notion of what both the "law" reads and what i was told. It has also been mentioned ( can find source) that "legally" after open carrying when you sit in your car and for the moment its not put in the compartment of the vehicle you are "conceal" carrying.

    I do understand the whole a LEO can legally lie to you and blah blah blah. But its a bit sad to read and see anytime ANYONE mentions they had been told by a LEO something the person gets instantly hot watered. By all means this certain LEO that I was told my above mentioning of yes seeing as I have known him for 15+ years I would be more then fine asking him a simple question about something as stated above. I would not ask him or inquire him for much more in depth laws or anything I would normally ask my attorney. Again the fact you clearly missed my mentioning of the bottom of my post about "of course others can clarify" meaning AGAIN I was simply passing along information, False in your mind sure. But thats my choice to do so in giving him the information.

    However I did chuckle @ your fine ATTEMPT at an insult about believing everything that is told to me by someone in a fancy uniform, So thanks for that.
    Last edited by LEX_XDM40compact; 04-07-2013 at 12:40 AM.

  11. #11
    Regular Member DrakeZ07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,107
    Quote Originally Posted by LEX_XDM40compact View Post
    I do take everything A leo tells me with a grain of salt. I never said I believed or thought he was right. I simply replied with what I was told and passed it along for him to note.

    Please dont "encourage" me to read laws lol as i have mentioned here several times im aware of the laws and I was again simply passing along what was told to me.

    Encouraged as the "law" reads in terms of carrying in a car.

    527.020 Carrying Concealed Deadly Weapon.
    (8) A loaded or unloaded firearm or other deadly weapon shall not be deemed concealed on or about the
    person if it is located in any enclosed container, compartment, or storage space [regularly] installed as
    original equipment in a motor vehicle by its manufacturer, including but not limited to a glove
    compartment, center console, or seat pocket, regardless of whether said enclosed container, storage
    space, or compartment is locked, unlocked, or does not have a locking mechanism. No person or
    organization, public or private, shall prohibit a person from keeping a loaded or unloaded firearm or
    ammunition, or both, or other deadly weapon in a vehicle in accordance with the provisions of this
    subsection. Any attempt by a person or organization, public or private, to violate the provisions of this
    subsection may be the subject of an action for appropriate relief or for damages in a Circuit Court or
    District Court of competent jurisdiction. This subsection shall not apply to any person prohibited from
    possessing a firearm pursuant to KRS 527.040.

    You asked for the law there you have it. Please now show me the LAW that says otherwise?

    Now im aware of rack mounting a rifle or shotgun to the rear windshield to your truck. However like I mentioned to him originally was a simple notion of what both the "law" reads and what i was told. It has also been mentioned ( can find source) that "legally" after open carrying when you sit in your car and for the moment its not put in the compartment of the vehicle you are "conceal" carrying.

    I do understand the whole a LEO can legally lie to you and blah blah blah. But its a bit sad to read and see anytime ANYONE mentions they had been told by a LEO something the person gets instantly hot watered. By all means this certain LEO that I was told my above mentioning of yes seeing as I have known him for 15+ years I would be more then fine asking him a simple question about something as stated above. I would not ask him or inquire him for much more in depth laws or anything I would normally ask my attorney. Again the fact you clearly missed my mentioning of the bottom of my post about "of course others can clarify" meaning AGAIN I was simply passing along information, False in your mind sure. But thats my choice to do so in giving him the information.

    However I did chuckle @ your fine ATTEMPT at an insult about believing everything that is told to me by someone in a fancy uniform, So thanks for that.
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post
    If it was not a concealed weapon when you were standing outside the car, it does not become a concealed weapon just because you get into a car.
    ^This.

    As much as I love destroying the egotistical pride, and know-it-all attitude of people involved in the same causes as myself, I'm going to have to recuse myself from this topic any further. Mr. Compact is either a troll, or an indoctrinated Gov't kissarse. Please, continue citing statues without any sense, or understanding about them, but if you would, please refrain from trying to 'educate' anyone about Ky's Gun laws and rights, at least as long as you have no freaking clue what you're talking about.
    I'm a proud openly gay open carrier~
    Trained SKYWARN spotter, and veteran Storm Chaser.
    =^.^= ~<3~ =^.^=
    Beware the Pink Camo clad gay redneck.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central KY
    Posts
    917
    I appreciate Lex_XDM's advice. I do have my CCDW so it doesn't matter how I carry. When I carry, I always want to make 100% sure that I am in the legal right. Personally, while I believe that it is legal to OC a handgun while sitting in a driver's seat, despite what everyone has said here, I cannot be 100% sure that I'm in the right.

  13. #13
    Regular Member LEX_XDM40compact's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    LEX, KY
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by DrakeZ07 View Post
    ^This.

    As much as I love destroying the egotistical pride, and know-it-all attitude of people involved in the same causes as myself, I'm going to have to recuse myself from this topic any further. Mr. Compact is either a troll, or an indoctrinated Gov't kissarse. Please, continue citing statues without any sense, or understanding about them, but if you would, please refrain from trying to 'educate' anyone about Ky's Gun laws and rights, at least as long as you have no freaking clue what you're talking about.
    You are a funny one huh? "know-it-all attitude " hahahahahaahahah. a quick search of your latest postings will show a few "dont believe anything a LEO tells you" Someone fail the academy? The statue itself seems pretty easy to understand to me. Again show me the statue and law that says different. Your ATTEMPT #2 at an insult again made me laugh! Thanks!

    @langzaiguy

    Awesome then. Thats all i was asking about the permit The stop itself im 100% with you on that.

    @gutshot again I do AGREE i was simply making the notion of the actual law and what was told to me.
    Last edited by LEX_XDM40compact; 04-07-2013 at 12:50 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •