Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: CC experience

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    68

    Post imported post

    New to the board thought I would introduce myself and share a CC experience I had in Woodinville and ask a quick question about it. Me and some buddies were out late at night during the few days that it flooded a month or two ago and I drove past a road closed sign in my truck and parked in a gas station (friends walked in but I wasnt about to get wet so I just drove in). Two Woodinville police drove into the area and saw me and my friends standing around. Yelled at a few of them walking away and wanted to talk to me and my friends. It started out bad because I said I wouldnt walk over to them (thru a foot of water), that I would drive over to them and after saying that they said I was getting a ticket etc I hopped into my truck and drove over to them (they werent in a good mood at this point). When I pulled out my license I also pulled out my CPL and when they saw that they asked if I was carrying at the moment. I said yes its on my right hip under my jacket and the older of the two said "I'll take that for right now" and I held my arms out while he removed my gun from my holster.

    Now to the question, some have told me thats a normal thing to do some have said they have no right to do that etc. Just wonding if thats something that normally happens when dealing with police? (btw after I saidI had a gun and it was pulled off of me they were the two nicest guys and everything was all good, didnt get a ticket). Another question is when some you guys/gals get stopped for speeding etc whats the etiquette on letting the LEO know that yourCC or even if you really need to tell them.Thanks in advance



    Marcus

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    You don't need to let them know in WA state. WA state law does not require it, no matter what an officer tells you. They also have no right under state law to remove your weapon. Politely refuse. Explain that you would be more than happy to step out of the vehicleand place your hands on top of it, but they have no right to remove your weapon.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    , Washington, USA
    Posts
    570

    Post imported post

    I would advise never volunteering you have a gun unless asked directly by an officer. It almost always unnecessarily complicates a simple situation.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    expvideo wrote:
    You don't need to let them know in WA state. WA state law does not require it, no matter what an officer tells you. They also have no right under state law to remove your weapon. Politely refuse. Explain that you would be more than happy to step out of the vehicleand place your hands on top of it, but they have no right to remove your weapon.
    Citation? I have seen posts by LEOs on this board saying that they will always disarm you for "officer safety".

  5. #5
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Out of three encounters with LEO, two in Oly, one in Seattle while OCing, only Oly feels the urge to disarm for "officer safety" Been stopped by the Coast Guard two times while CCing, and they just wanted me to keep my hands visible....

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    heresolong wrote:
    expvideo wrote:
    You don't need to let them know in WA state. WA state law does not require it, no matter what an officer tells you. They also have no right under state law to remove your weapon. Politely refuse. Explain that you would be more than happy to step out of the vehicleand place your hands on top of it, but they have no right to remove your weapon.
    Citation? I have seen posts by LEOs on this board saying that they will always disarm you for "officer safety".
    Why don't you cite? There are no laws allowing actions, only laws restricting actions. I can't cite that something is legal, but if you disagree with me you can go ahead and cite where it is not legal.



    The police are allowed to disarm you while they investigate a crime. They can't just go around disarming citizens for no reason. This is America. I'll cite the 2nd Amendment, and that will just have to be good enough for you, until you find something better to prove me wrong.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , Washington, USA
    Posts
    194

    Post imported post

    I've been stopped 3 times in 10 years carrying. I hand them my CPL along with my liscence and have had one officer say "Thanks" as he handed it back, one said "I don't need that" as he handed it back, and the 3rd one just handed it back. Only one of them wrote mea ticket.

    One stop by the Coast Gaurd where they asked me if I had a weapon onboard and I told them yes, they didn't seem to care. We discussed safety equipment and I went on my way.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    expvideo wrote:
    heresolong wrote:
    expvideo wrote:
    You don't need to let them know in WA state. WA state law does not require it, no matter what an officer tells you. They also have no right under state law to remove your weapon. Politely refuse. Explain that you would be more than happy to step out of the vehicleand place your hands on top of it, but they have no right to remove your weapon.
    Citation? I have seen posts by LEOs on this board saying that they will always disarm you for "officer safety".
    Why don't you cite? There are no laws allowing actions, only laws restricting actions. I can't cite that something is legal, but if you disagree with me you can go ahead and cite where it is not legal.

    The police are allowed to disarm you while they investigate a crime. They can't just go around disarming citizens for no reason. This is America. I'll cite the 2nd Amendment, and that will just have to be good enough for you, until you find something better to prove me wrong.
    Well for one thing, I'm not trying to prove you wrong. Chill out. I would, however, like to see a law that says that they can if in fact the LEOs are right so that I don't violate it by refusing to let them disarm me. I would also be interested in any court cases that say that I don't have to disarm.

    The Second Amendment doesn't say a thing about whether or not LEOs can disarm you if they stop you for something. It is absolutely silent on the matter.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    heresolong wrote:
    expvideo wrote:
    heresolong wrote:
    expvideo wrote:
    You don't need to let them know in WA state. WA state law does not require it, no matter what an officer tells you. They also have no right under state law to remove your weapon. Politely refuse. Explain that you would be more than happy to step out of the vehicleand place your hands on top of it, but they have no right to remove your weapon.
    Citation? I have seen posts by LEOs on this board saying that they will always disarm you for "officer safety".
    Why don't you cite? There are no laws allowing actions, only laws restricting actions. I can't cite that something is legal, but if you disagree with me you can go ahead and cite where it is not legal.

    The police are allowed to disarm you while they investigate a crime. They can't just go around disarming citizens for no reason. This is America. I'll cite the 2nd Amendment, and that will just have to be good enough for you, until you find something better to prove me wrong.
    Well for one thing, I'm not trying to prove you wrong. Chill out. I would, however, like to see a law that says that they can if in fact the LEOs are right so that I don't violate it by refusing to let them disarm me. I would also be interested in any court cases that say that I don't have to disarm.

    The Second Amendment doesn't say a thing about whether or not LEOs can disarm you if they stop you for something. It is absolutely silent on the matter.
    I know what you're saying, and I am chill. I was saying that laws are not there to tell you what you can do, so there is no law that says you can refuse to give up your gun, just like there is no law that says you are allowed to cook eggs. Laws are there to tell you what you can't do. There isn't a law saying that you can't refuse to give the cop your gun, without him having a reason for detaining you, in which case he can confiscate the gun for the durration of the encouter (this means traffic stops).

    But a cop can't just take your gun for no reason while he runs your papers, unless you are being investigated for a crime.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    expvideo wrote:
    I know what you're saying, and I am chill. I was saying that laws are not there to tell you what you can do, so there is no law that says you can refuse to give up your gun, just like there is no law that says you are allowed to cook eggs. Laws are there to tell you what you can't do. There isn't a law saying that you can't refuse to give the cop your gun, without him having a reason for detaining you, in which case he can confiscate the gun for the durration of the encouter (this means traffic stops).

    But a cop can't just take your gun for no reason while he runs your papers, unless you are being investigated for a crime.
    So there's the rub. Since it seems like almost every stop that has been recorded on this forum has started with a call to 911 or a traffic stop, both of which require investigation of a possible crime. So I would agree that it doesn't seem like they can just throw me against a building and take my gun, if they are allegedly stopping me to investigate a reported crime then they can(?) take my gun?

    You started by saying that in WA state they have no right to take your gun. I think that the original story included driving past a "road closed" sign. Then can they take your gun while they "investigate" and decide whether or not to give you a ticket?

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    363

    Post imported post

    State patrol pulled me over once,whenIhanded him my licence and CPL (beforeI knew any better),he asked what my CPL was. I responsed "That's my concealed pistol licence, I'm carrying, wasn't sure if you cared". He looks at me with this mean, mean a** look "I DON'T",hands it back,"unless you plan on doing something stupid" puts his hand on his gun and continues the 'i'm gonna rip your head off and spit down your neck' look. I swallow hard, " no, Sir". "great" he turns his frown upsidedown"fix your tail light" and walks away.

    ScorpioMk wrote:
    "I'll take that for right now"
    I think the correct response would be "You can pry it from my cold dead hands."



  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    68

    Post imported post

    heresolong wrote:
    You started by saying that in WA state they have no right to take your gun. I think that the original story included driving past a "road closed" sign. Then can they take your gun while they "investigate" and decide whether or not to give you a ticket?
    After reading that response too thats what im still wondering about. I had intentionally driven past road closed signs at night and me and friends were wondering around a closed gas station.



    Marcus

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    573

    Post imported post

    RCW 9.41.098 states that you can only be disarmed if you commited a felony or a crime in which your gun was used or displayed. As far as this "officer safety" thing, please quote me an RCW that gives an officer legal grounds to disarm a citizen. I've searched everywhere and cannot find one. Please help?

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    363

    Post imported post

    G27 wrote:
    RCW 9.41.098 states that you can only be disarmed if you commited a felony or a crime in which your gun was used or displayed. As far as this "officer safety" thing, please quote me an RCW that gives an officer legal grounds to disarm a citizen. I've searched everywhere and cannot find one. Please help?
    There isn't one. The jokes on you. :P

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    573

    Post imported post

    DrewGunner wrote:
    G27 wrote:
    RCW 9.41.098 states that you can only be disarmed if you commited a felony or a crime in which your gun was used or displayed. As far as this "officer safety" thing, please quote me an RCW that gives an officer legal grounds to disarm a citizen. I've searched everywhere and cannot find one. Please help?
    There isn't one. The jokes on you. :P
    I feel like an ass.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    G27 wrote:
    DrewGunner wrote:
    G27 wrote:
    RCW 9.41.098 states that you can only be disarmed if you commited a felony or a crime in which your gun was used or displayed. As far as this "officer safety" thing, please quote me an RCW that gives an officer legal grounds to disarm a citizen. I've searched everywhere and cannot find one. Please help?
    There isn't one. The jokes on you. :P
    I feel like an ass.
    That's because Officer safety is not an RCW. Some time back in another thread this topic was being discussed. I posted a 2 part doc that contains case law and a partial explanation of Officer safety. Here it is again, and be sure to open the 2nd half in the next post as it was too large to be attached in 1.

    The basic concept is this; If at any time an Officer feels that there is a safety issue during any type of contact with an armed person, he may at his discretion disarm that person during theperiod of the contact.

    Most times this isn't necessary, as most armed citizens do not appear to pose a threat, however if a person is acting twitchy, or brushes a hand across the gun, this may be cause for caution. Also if an Officer is by himself, that is also a justified reason. There are many different factorsto be considered. There are no hard and fast rules as all scenarios are different, but the courts have ruled in favor of Officer safety as a valid reason for a person to be disarmed. The exact reason why or when this occurs is discretionary to the Officer.


    Standby for part 2.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    Part 2.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    425

    Post imported post

    Just to clarify Johnny Law's post - an officer can take your weapon for the duration of a stop, citing officer safety - but ONLY if the Terry Stop is legal. If you're pulled over for speeding, they can confiscate. If you're stopped for investigation of a crime, they can confiscate. But they cannot confiscate just because you have the gun (unless, as in this instance, you appear to be too young to own a weapon). There has to be reasonable, articulable suspicion of a crime first.

    If they don't have PC for a stop, they also don't have the authority to disarm you.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    Cue-Ball wrote:
    Just to clarify Johnny Law's post - an officer can take your weapon for the duration of a stop, citing officer safety - but ONLY if the Terry Stop is legal. If you're pulled over for speeding, they can confiscate. If you're stopped for investigation of a crime, they can confiscate. But they cannot confiscate just because you have the gun (unless, as in this instance, you appear to be too young to own a weapon). There has to be reasonable, articulable suspicion of a crime first.

    If they don't have PC for a stop, they also don't have the authority to disarm you.
    Yes.



    I once was pulled over and while I was digging out my license from my wallet, the officer saw my CPL and asked me if I had a weapon. I told him that I did, and it was currently in the glovebox. He ran my license and wrote me a ticket. Then he told me that he needed to run the serial number of my gun to make sure that it was legitimate. I asked him why he needed to do this, and he said that it was standard procedure. I was running late and I didn't feel like being tased, so I let him, and thought I would just file a complaint. I went to the sheriff's office to complain, and I was told that if I wanted to file a formal complaint, I would have to have a lawyer file it. I can't afford a lawyer, so this cop will continue to disrespect peoples' 4th amendment rights.

    Officer safety is one thing, but unlawfully searching and running serial numbers is NOT standard procedure and is not acceptable. If you see my TV in my entertainment center while you are investigating a noise complaint, you can't just tell me "hey, I see you have a TV. I need to run the serial number of your TV to make sure it isn't stolen. It's standard procedure." It's the same thing with my gun.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    Cue-Ball wrote:
    Just to clarify Johnny Law's post - an officer can take your weapon for the duration of a stop, citing officer safety - but ONLY if the Terry Stop is legal. If you're pulled over for speeding, they can confiscate. If you're stopped for investigation of a crime, they can confiscate. But they cannot confiscate just because you have the gun (unless, as in this instance, you appear to be too young to own a weapon). There has to be reasonable, articulable suspicion of a crime first.

    If they don't have PC for a stop, they also don't have the authority to disarm you.
    Only reasonable suspicion need exist during a contact for a temporary Officer safety disarm. This applies to any contact be it pedestrian, vehicle stop, or wherever. The gun is then returned (usually unloaded) at the end of the contact.

    A social contact (Police walk up and say hi) would not qualify, as the Officer has chosen to be in the proximity of the armed person.

    Confiscation is a separate topic, and usually applies to arrest situations, where if someone is going to jail, obviously their gun isn't going with them. Confiscation can be temporary or permanent.
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    Only reasonable suspicion need exist during a contact for a temporary Officer safety disarm.
    Although hopefully you will admit that a man carrying a gun in a holster no longer qualifies as reasonable suspicion in Washington.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    heresolong wrote:
    Johnny Law wrote:
    Only reasonable suspicion need exist during a contact for a temporary Officer safety disarm.
    Although hopefully you will admit that a man carrying a gun in a holster no longer qualifies as reasonable suspicion in Washington.
    That is true, there would have to be other factors present to warrant it.
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    573

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the case law, Johnny. I do understand the object of officer safety and I am all for it. If I worked in that profession I would want to make it home to my wife and kids, too. But my question is when does officer safety begin to violate a person's rights? An officer cannot just disarm you if he is giving you a ticket for speeding? So do you think it would just be best to not say anything unless specifically asked?

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    I used to offer my CPL with my license because officers seemed to appreciate it. I don't do that anymore. Officers have a tendancy to show their appreciation by disarming me, unloading my gun (sometimes unsafely), putting it in my trunk, and lecturing me about how I shouldn't be carrying a gun. So long story short, now I don't give a rat's ass what makes them more comfortable. It's none of their damn business.

  25. #25
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    Only reasonable suspicion need exist during a contact for a temporary Officer safety disarm. This applies to any contact be it pedestrian, vehicle stop, or wherever. The gun is then returned (usually unloaded) at the end of the contact.

    A social contact (Police walk up and say hi) would not qualify, as the Officer has chosen to be in the proximity of the armed person.

    Confiscation is a separate topic, and usually applies to arrest situations, where if someone is going to jail, obviously their gun isn't going with them. Confiscation can be temporary or permanent.
    Please cite. Please also clarify when the entire stop is unjustified per Terry. Things are going to get VERY expensive for Olympia if they keep this crap up, and so far none of them have been able to justify any of their insane behavior.

    Steve

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •