davidmcbeth
Banned
This is an interesting point. Ultimately, I believe the overall conclusion is that government's massive inconsistencies and contradictions arise from trying to explain away or gloss over what they're really up to; but, for the moment, I'll focus on the bold-face text in your quote.
In VA our CCW permits are called concealed handgun permits (CHP). The little card in your wallet is the license. It is the official government document and carries the circuit court judges original signature. Not a copy of his signature, the actual ink from the actual pen the circuit court judge used to sign your permit. Yet, police insist on being able to check the state police database containing all permits statewide. This is irrational and absurd. If I provide the cop with the actual legal document signed by the judge, that is it. Yet, police seem to hold that the damned actual legal document does not count until they verify it against the database. Which is hogwash, of course. The only verification would be to check the judge's signature against a sample of the judge's signature. Otherwise, the police are really saying the legal document does not count as a legal document until they decide it is a legal document.
Of course, what they're really up to is something more in the vicinity of being able to arrest someone for a revoked permit who did not turn in his permit. (Maybe VCDL can research the number of revoked permits statewide?) This argument came up years ago on this forum. A cop registrant on the forum held fast to the idea that it was important for cops to be able to compare the presented permit against revoked permits in the database. Of course, that cop did not realize he was giving away that police do not really consider the holder of a revoked permit all that dangerous--or they willfully let dangerous revoked-permit holders walk among us. If they considered a revoked permit all that important, they would move heaven and earth to track down the holder of the revoked permit and take it back, not just log it in a database and wait for the person to stumble into a cop during a traffic stop. The fact they do not track down and recover revoked permits proves they don't think it is all that important. Meaning, they know that even the possessor of a revoked permit is not automatically dangerous.
Yet, my permit doesn't count unless the police officer confronting me verifies it against the state police database. Meaning, its not really a valid legal document until the police say it is, not the judge who signed literally the piece of paper I handed the cop. Oh, they want the judge or magistrate's signature on their warrant application, but suddenly when its a CHP, the judge's original signature doesn't really count.
Good points. And leads to this query: has anyone sued for extending a stop beyond the needed time for the traffic ticket? After all, checking a database extends the stop for no needed reason.