Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 60

Thread: Question about an officer demanding identification

  1. #1
    Regular Member bebop4one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    142

    Question about an officer demanding identification

    I have a question about RCW 9.41.050. I was looking over the OC pamphlet that's available here on the forums because I'm considering carrying a few copies with me. The language that I have a question about it this:

    (b) Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so.

    I understand what it means. It means that if you are concealing a pistol a police officer has a right to ask you for your CPL. But the language doesn't specify when the officer can't ask for your CPL.

    Scenario: An officer sees you open carrying and wants to question you or get identification from you. You inform the officer that you are doing nothing illegal and ask if you are being detained (I'm sure there are other responses you could give). The officer then says that he/she demands to see your CPL if you have one.

    What do you do? RCW 9.41.050 doesn't specify a situation where you can refuse the request. You don't want to lie and say that you don't have one (it's only a lie if you do have one I guess). The officer is getting around the not having to provide ID issue by demanding the CPL. Would they be within their right to do so? I get that open carrying doesn't require a CPL but if they see you open carrying it makes sense that you might have one. I've wondered about this and would like an opinion.
    Last edited by bebop4one; 03-12-2014 at 10:43 PM.
    "I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
    - Clint Eastwood

  2. #2
    Regular Member ARADCOM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    NW Washington, Washington, USA
    Posts
    317

    Thumbs up Can't show it if you don't have it.

    Quote Originally Posted by bebop4one View Post
    (b) Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license"

    If you are open carrying you are not required to have a CPL, or to have it on you if you have one, so this would not be a situation where a LEO could demand to see your CPL.
    Last edited by ARADCOM; 03-12-2014 at 11:02 PM. Reason: Spelling

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by bebop4one View Post
    I have a question about RCW 9.41.050. I was looking over the OC pamphlet that's available here on the forums because I'm considering carrying a few copies with me. The language that I have a question about it this:

    (b) Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so.

    I understand what it means. It means that if you are concealing a pistol a police officer has a right to ask you for your CPL. But the language doesn't specify when the officer can't ask for your CPL.

    Scenario: An officer sees you open carrying and wants to question you or get identification from you. You inform the officer that you are doing nothing illegal and ask if you are being detained (I'm sure there are other responses you could give). The officer then says that he/she demands to see your CPL if you have one.

    What do you do? RCW 9.41.050 doesn't specify a situation where you can refuse the request. You don't want to lie and say that you don't have one (it's only a lie if you do have one I guess). The officer is getting around the not having to provide ID issue by demanding the CPL. Would they be within their right to do so? I get that open carrying doesn't require a CPL but if they see you open carrying it makes sense that you might have one. I've wondered about this and would like an opinion.
    I normally do not carry my CPL when I am OC nor do I carry my DL when not driving, if you do not have it you can not show it.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  4. #4
    Regular Member bebop4one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    I normally do not carry my CPL when I am OC nor do I carry my DL when not driving, if you do not have it you can not show it.
    The only reason I'm reluctant to do that is because I don't want any issues getting in and out of my car. Also I don't want an officer to lie and say my weapon is partially concealed. So does that mean when you OC you don't drive?
    "I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
    - Clint Eastwood

  5. #5
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Back in the old days, an honest person would carry openly, but someone who wanted/needed to conceal (as almost any criminal might) required permission do to something that an honest person wouldn't. As with a lot of other things, the meaning seems to have done a 180-degree shift.


    Did you know that describing something like the Sistine Chapel as "awful, artificial, an egregious example of what manufactured artwork can be" is actually complimentary?
    Awful - Inspiring wonder or awe
    Artificial - artfully and skillfully constructed
    Egregious - something that is remarkably good
    Manufactured - something made by hand, from "manual"
    All those mean the opposite of what they were understood to mean long ago.

  6. #6
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,865
    Quote Originally Posted by bebop4one View Post
    The only reason I'm reluctant to do that is because I don't want any issues getting in and out of my car. Also I don't want an officer to lie and say my weapon is partially concealed. So does that mean when you OC you don't drive?
    as has been espoused on this illustrious forum many many times...

    may i help you officer? followed by am i free to go? repeat twice ok, three times if you must and then walk away...

    i am sorry to have to inform you, your parents lied to you about a great many things, santa claus, the tooth fairy, Easter bunny, etc. why it is advocated by the membership to carry a recorder...mitigates the lying doesn't it.

    though i am shocked you believe a sworn LE would lie about a citizens actions...(sarcasm not withstanding)
    ipse...
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  7. #7
    Regular Member bebop4one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    142
    I appreciate the feedback but none of these answer my question. What if I don't leave my CPL at home. It's on me and a cop demands to see it. Am I required to give it to him?
    "I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
    - Clint Eastwood

  8. #8
    Regular Member ARADCOM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    NW Washington, Washington, USA
    Posts
    317

    Cool No!

    Quote Originally Posted by bebop4one View Post
    I appreciate the feedback but none of these answer my question. What if I don't leave my CPL at home. It's on me and a cop demands to see it. Am I required to give it to him?

    No, you are not.

    "display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so."

    If you're not required by law to have one or carry it if you do, you can't be required by law to display it.

    And you can certainly OC and drive if you leave your CPL in the car, which is the only place you'd be legally required to have it in your possession while OC'ing.

  9. #9
    Regular Member bebop4one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by ARADCOM View Post
    No, you are not.

    "display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so."

    If you're not required by law to have one or carry it if you do, you can't be required by law to display it.

    And you can certainly OC and drive if you leave your CPL in the car, which is the only place you'd be legally required to have it in your possession while OC'ing.
    Good point about leaving it in the car. The moment you enter the car you're covered.
    "I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
    - Clint Eastwood

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,150
    This statute cited says display and not surrender.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    This statute cited says display and not surrender.
    Good luck with that one. MO has the same wording. If you are not CCing (you are OCing) you can refuse to "display" your "permit." Not a darn thing the cop can do but arrest you for contempt of cop.

    Now, if you are required to have a "permit" on you to OC then you must "display" when a cop "requests" your "permit."

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,150
    The difference between display and surrender is the difference between Fourth Amendment security in your papers and a warranted seizure. If he wants to hold your papers, them make him document the arrest and warrant. Feel the love.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  13. #13
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,270
    The difference be between the right word and the almost right word, is the difference between lightning and lightning bug.

  14. #14
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Without PC or RS of a crime the officer is not supposed to stop you to ask for it. They cannot gleam by mere observation that you don't have one so the assumption is to be that you do and they are not supposed to demand to see it.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  15. #15
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Back in the old days, an honest person would carry openly, but someone who wanted/needed to conceal (as almost any criminal might) required permission do to something that an honest person wouldn't. As with a lot of other things, the meaning seems to have done a 180-degree shift.


    Did you know that describing something like the Sistine Chapel as "awful, artificial, an egregious example of what manufactured artwork can be" is actually complimentary?
    Awful - Inspiring wonder or awe
    Artificial - artfully and skillfully constructed
    Egregious - something that is remarkably good
    Manufactured - something made by hand, from "manual"
    All those mean the opposite of what they were understood to mean long ago.
    Calling someone nice was once grounds for a duel to the death. In the original meaning, fun was a synonym of kill.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    One thing to remember, and I'm not a fan of teaching LE to be more overly-entitled, is that if an officer -demands- anything in his scope, you should comply, that includes getting out of the car, rolling down the window, or showing ID. You might ask 'sir, am I legally required to do this (or that)', and perhaps get it on video or audio to fight later.

    If he or she -asks- you can say 'I'd rather not'.
    Last edited by Maverick9; 03-13-2014 at 10:29 AM.

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick9 View Post
    One thing to remember, and I'm not a fan of teaching LE to be more overly-entitled, is that if an officer -demands- anything in his scope, you should comply, that includes getting out of the car, rolling down the window, or showing ID. You might ask 'sir, am I legally required to do this (or that)', and perhaps get it on video or audio to fight later.

    If he or she -asks- you can say 'I'd rather not'.
    Depends on the situation. There have been times they have demanded and I didn't comply, because I knew I was in the right.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  18. #18
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Depends on the situation. There have been times they have demanded and I didn't comply, because I knew I was in the right.
    For instance?

    Remember an officer doesn't have to explain their RAS. You're walking a dangerous line not to comply with a demand from an armed stranger with a badge.
    Last edited by Maverick9; 03-13-2014 at 10:49 AM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by bebop4one View Post
    The only reason I'm reluctant to do that is because I don't want any issues getting in and out of my car. Also I don't want an officer to lie and say my weapon is partially concealed. So does that mean when you OC you don't drive?
    I drive I just leave my DL and CPL in the car.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick9 View Post
    For instance?

    Remember an officer doesn't have to explain their RAS. You're walking a dangerous line not to comply with a demand from an armed stranger with a badge.
    In Washington one only has to identify them selves if they are being arrested or cited if you are not being arrested or cited then you do not have to show ID simple as that. When asked for ID my first question is what crime do you suspect me of having committed am committing or are about to commit. If they say none then the Cop gets no ID simple as that.

    I am not going to cite because this has been discussed over and over again on this site.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by bebop4one View Post
    SNIP
    Scenario: An officer sees you open carrying and wants to question you or get identification from you. You inform the officer that you are doing nothing illegal and ask if you are being detained (I'm sure there are other responses you could give). The officer then says that he/she demands to see your CPL if you have one.

    What do you do? RCW 9.41.050 doesn't specify a situation where you can refuse the request. You don't want to lie and say that you don't have one (it's only a lie if you do have one I guess). The officer is getting around the not having to provide ID issue by demanding the CPL. Would they be within their right to do so? I get that open carrying doesn't require a CPL but if they see you open carrying it makes sense that you might have one. I've wondered about this and would like an opinion.
    I remind them that I am not required to have a CPL to open carry.

    After I caught the "display" and not "surrender" my CPL when required I only removed it from my wallet and held on to it the whole time I was displaying it. I was then asked for photo ID. I asked why. They told me it's because I could have found that CPL on the ground and it could belong to someone else. I then asked him to show me the law that required me to carry any ID and if he had any RAS that I was not the legal holder of the CPL.

    They hate that.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  22. #22
    Regular Member bebop4one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    142
    This is obviously a one-off type of scenario. It's just good to be prepared. I think I'll stick with the "I'm not required to have a CPL to open carry" statement and repeat that until they give up and leave.
    "I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
    - Clint Eastwood

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,761
    Would they be within their right to do so?


    "they" being the State of Washington.

    If you're going to be a freedom fighter, please use the correct language: Governments do not have rights, only authority. Only individual people have rights.

    A police officer is an agent of the state. When he asks for ID, it's the State of Washington asking, not a person.

    "Would they be within their authority to do so?"

  24. #24
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    In Washington one only has to identify them selves if they are being arrested or cited if you are not being arrested or cited then you do not have to show ID simple as that. When asked for ID my first question is what crime do you suspect me of having committed am committing or are about to commit. If they say none then the Cop gets no ID simple as that.

    I am not going to cite because this has been discussed over and over again on this site.
    If you resemble a person they're seeking, you won't even get that far, but remember I'm saying it's hazardous to fail to obey an officer's DEMAND. That got one woman's window busted out who was stopped for an equipment violation and she got thrown to the ground.


  25. #25
    Regular Member Vitaeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington
    Posts
    593
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    The difference between display and surrender is the difference between Fourth Amendment security in your papers and a warranted seizure. If he wants to hold your papers, them make him document the arrest and warrant. Feel the love.
    Nice sentiment, but WA case law doesn't really support your assertion.

    https://fortress.wa.gov/cjtc/www/ima...%2001%2013.pdf

    Simply holding your license/CPL isn't a seizure, there has to be further restrictions/conditions.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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