I think what he was saying Jim, is you can't lie....Like saying "no".
-
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.
-
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.
Chesterfield Chippers
- Thread starter peter nap
- Start date
I think what he was saying Jim, is you can't lie....Like saying "no".
And yes.....word games are a slippery slope so if you don't have the disposition for it, don't.
JamesCanby
Activist Member
I haven't yet figured out how to embed multiple quotes in a response, but this refers to the most recent postings ... and is posted in my own frustration regarding how the law may be "interpreted" by three very knowledgeable members, and much more by how a LEO may act. (And, thanks, Grape, for the cites.)
Scenario: I am driving and get pulled over by a LEO. He runs my plate and DL and gets advised of my CHP status. He asks if I am carrying -- I have not volunteered that information previously nor have I given him my CHP along with my DL, registration and insurance card. Upon being asked, I tell him truthfully that I am not carrying concealed. (I may be carrying my firearm secured in a container or not carrying at all, and I do not inform him of that, only that I am not carrying concealed.) Does that give him RAS?
If I am not carrying concealed, do I have to show him my CHP on demand? I've been told I don't have to disclose or show it to him if I'm not carrying concealed.
I'm not trying to be obtuse here, just trying to nail this thing down, and I appreciate your help.
Last edited:
Multiple quotes - PM sent.
Most officers know how to play the game and will ask you if you have a gun in the vehicle with you, but if you are not actually CCing then no you do not have to produce your CHP.
JamesCanby
Activist Member
Thanks, Grape. That verifies what I thought I had been told in class. And thanks to Pro and Peter for their input -- no disrespect intended by the "interpretation" comment, just wanted to gain a better understanding of what I may be faced with if stopped, especially since I have the big orange VCDL sticker on the back of my car...
Thanks also, Grape, for the instructional message.
va_tazdad
Regular Member
I believe the CHP warning is tagged to the vehicle registration by owner name.
I was asked by a Chesty when he walked up to the car before I gave him any ID.
I was asked by a Chesty when he walked up to the car before I gave him any ID.
Thundar
Regular Member
Prepping a FOIA - what does everybody think?
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request
From>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To: Col. Thierry G. Dupuis
Background:
I have read on gun rights websites that a policy has been implemented within the Chesterfield Police Department to always seize the weapon of a Concealed Handgun Permit (CHP) owner during a traffic stop, only returning the firearm at the end of the encounter. Such a policy would, of course, grossly exceed the authority of police officers, who may only seize a firearm when the totality of the circumstances indicates that a person is both armed and dangerous.
As a Licensed Federal Firearms Dealer such a policy is of great concern to me. I often travel with over 100 firearms in my van, and such a policy would cause significant unnecessary delay, interrupting my ability to engage in interstate commerce.
FOIA Request:
1) Any written policy, instruction, direction, procedure, requirement, custom, etc., which sets forth the actions required or expected of a Chesterfield Police Department peace officer, law enforcement officer, patrolman, member, etc. when encountering an armed citizen or CHP holder during a traffic stop.
2) Any written policy, instruction, direction, procedure, requirement, custom, etc., which sets forth the actions required or expected of a Chesterfield Police Department peace officer, law enforcement officer, patrolman, member, etc. when encountering an armed citizen or CHP holder during a non- consensual stop detention or encounter.
3) Any data, statistic or scientific evidence used to formulate or develop any written policy, instruction, direction procedure, requirement, etc. requested in request #1 or #2 (above).
FOIA Request Instructions:
1) Please deliver the information requested via electronic record to >>>>>>>>
2) Please do not photocopy information or send information by mail or courier service.
3) The scope of this request is deliberately narrow and focused. Please do not commit to more than $25.00 of work, effort, research or clerical work without obtaining my prior agreement to pay for such work, effort, research, or clerical work.
Thank you in advance for your support to open government and obidience to Commonwealth law.
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request
From>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To: Col. Thierry G. Dupuis
Background:
I have read on gun rights websites that a policy has been implemented within the Chesterfield Police Department to always seize the weapon of a Concealed Handgun Permit (CHP) owner during a traffic stop, only returning the firearm at the end of the encounter. Such a policy would, of course, grossly exceed the authority of police officers, who may only seize a firearm when the totality of the circumstances indicates that a person is both armed and dangerous.
As a Licensed Federal Firearms Dealer such a policy is of great concern to me. I often travel with over 100 firearms in my van, and such a policy would cause significant unnecessary delay, interrupting my ability to engage in interstate commerce.
FOIA Request:
1) Any written policy, instruction, direction, procedure, requirement, custom, etc., which sets forth the actions required or expected of a Chesterfield Police Department peace officer, law enforcement officer, patrolman, member, etc. when encountering an armed citizen or CHP holder during a traffic stop.
2) Any written policy, instruction, direction, procedure, requirement, custom, etc., which sets forth the actions required or expected of a Chesterfield Police Department peace officer, law enforcement officer, patrolman, member, etc. when encountering an armed citizen or CHP holder during a non- consensual stop detention or encounter.
3) Any data, statistic or scientific evidence used to formulate or develop any written policy, instruction, direction procedure, requirement, etc. requested in request #1 or #2 (above).
FOIA Request Instructions:
1) Please deliver the information requested via electronic record to >>>>>>>>
2) Please do not photocopy information or send information by mail or courier service.
3) The scope of this request is deliberately narrow and focused. Please do not commit to more than $25.00 of work, effort, research or clerical work without obtaining my prior agreement to pay for such work, effort, research, or clerical work.
Thank you in advance for your support to open government and obidience to Commonwealth law.
speed41ae
Regular Member
It is my understanding (Please correct me if I am wrong) that if you are pulled over for a traffic violation (breaking a law) that the LEO can seize both you and your vehicle a search both.
drewf
Regular Member
Chesterfield PD is turning into one of the most aggresively anti gun/RKBA agencies in the state - and the problem as well as the solution begins at the top.
Sorry Col. but the buck stops here.
Where does this mandatory disarmament begin and end? It seems clear that traffic stops are fair game, BUT how about if I have a break-in and call for an officer, or have a consensual conversation at a quick stop?
Sorry sir, but I must disarm you for officer safety before I can take your report or tell you what time it is.:banghead: :cuss:
So are they going to teach the manual of arms for every potential concealable firearm to all officers? Sometimes I carry a NAA mini in a pocket holster when deep concealing. Seems to me it's statistically...oh, about a MILLION times safer for them to leave it alone. Unless you want someone unfamiliar with single action revolvers that need to be half-cocked in order to be unloaded fooling with it by the side of the road while under stress. Just my two cents.
Repeater
Regular Member
Am I now permitted to lie w/o recourse? That would level the playing field
No no no - do not Bear False Witness please.
However, you are not required to answer or otherwise cooperate with a LEO's request. A lawful command perhaps, but a request is just that -- a request.
I do wonder if we can collaborate and try and develop a standard script for just such an occasion.
Something that begins:
Officer: "So, do you have any weapons in the vehicle?"
Virginian: "So, am I free to leave?"
Because if you are free to leave, then the LEO has ended the investigative detention. He may not prolong the detention further.
LEAVE NOW!
§ 18.2-308. Carrying concealed weapons; exceptions; penalty.
C. 10
Seems that carrying in a secured container or compartment is considered concealed carry.
As for the displaying it to the officer question -
It says that you must have the CHP on your person when CCing. The portions that relate to displaying it on demand relate to carrying CC, but do not linguistically or stylistically seem to be confined absolutely to CCing. That said, a LEO could cite you for not displaying on demand even if you were not carrying. As for how well he might succeed I have no case law to provide guidance.
stay safe.
Hold the presses
Just a little more explanation.
The Academy has been teaching that it is the officers decision as to taking the weapon. I was told this in the same conversation.
One ranking officer observed a weapon not being taken and after consulting with the powers, altered the policy.
Other members with higher contacts have looked into it and aren't aware of any changes in policy....so right now, I'm not sure which is correct.
I am certain of my source, but I'm not certain if their directive was really a change of policy or just a Supervisors whim.
I may have cried wolf on this.
Just a little more explanation.
The Academy has been teaching that it is the officers decision as to taking the weapon. I was told this in the same conversation.
One ranking officer observed a weapon not being taken and after consulting with the powers, altered the policy.
Other members with higher contacts have looked into it and aren't aware of any changes in policy....so right now, I'm not sure which is correct.
I am certain of my source, but I'm not certain if their directive was really a change of policy or just a Supervisors whim.
I may have cried wolf on this.
Repeater
Regular Member
Uh ... oh.
Busting gun owners, treating them like little school children, is wrong. Oh, I'm sorry. Never mind.
Repeater
Regular Member
Chesterfield PD is turning into one of the most aggresively anti gun/RKBA agencies in the state - and the problem as well as the solution begins at the top.
Where does this mandatory disarmament begin and end? It seems clear that traffic stops are fair game, BUT how about if I have a break-in and call for an officer, or have a consensual conversation at a quick stop?
Sorry sir, but I must disarm you for officer safety before I can take your report or tell you what time it is.
Well stated.
I wonder, it's been a while since we last discussed this case, but wouldn't U.S. v. Black be helpful in this circumstance?
This very thoughtful analysis is quite helpful, I think.
Thank you - that's the one I was thinking about earlier, but neglected to search for it.
Fourth Circuit Finds That Carrying a Firearm in an Open-Carry State Does Not Create Reasonable Suspicion and Provides Thorough Analysis of the "Free to Leave" Standard of Seizure.
Repeater
Regular Member
Glad to help. This case ought to be in some kind of ready-reference bin.
You know, for future reference.
JamesCanby
Activist Member
What did he ask you and and how did you respond? Were you carrying OC or CC? Was he satisfied with your response or did he "disarm you for his safety."
Last edited:
Thundar
Regular Member
I'm still unsure what's going on Thundar. I know it was run by and approved by the Commonwealths Attorney and at least some patrol officers have been instructed to do it....
It may just be on the way to being policy.
Two things I'm certain of.
1. The honesty of my source.
2. The honesty of our member who checked with the department.
It may just be on the way to being policy.
Two things I'm certain of.
1. The honesty of my source.
2. The honesty of our member who checked with the department.
va_tazdad
Regular Member
His first words were Mr.XXXXX do you have a gun in your possession?
I replied (Having come from a site that does not allow firearms) I advised I did not have a gun.
He asked for my license and registration and where I had just come from.
I advised I had just departed one of my sites and could provide the off duty CCPD officer's name if he would like it.
I was seen driving past an active arson location and was reported by another CCPD officer on scene.
Seems the CHP list is tagged to the DMV information on his computer.