imported post
Wow, scary!!
As a LEO who has worked both here and in an anti-gun state such as CA, I have a unique perspective on this topic.
CA (and assumingly most highly regulated/restricted gun states) create an attitude that owning or carrying a firearm is a priviledge, not a right. The cops, conversely, have the 'right' to carry guns. This creates a 'two-tiered' society, and a sort of 'police-state' attitude in many LEO's. This is enforced at the academy level, in field training, and in day-to-day duty. The concept that citizens have firearms only at the whim of the gov't allows officers to feel they have the right to suspend that whim, and belittle those citizens.
Conversely, in a strong 2A rights state like AZ, gun ownership and carrying is a right of all residents, LEO or non-LEO. The mere fact that the cop can carry a gun makes him no more special than joe citizen.
Now, from a personal perspective, when I stop someone and they tell me they have a firearm in the car, or on their person (and I always assume everyone does, whether they say so or not), I only want to know where it is (its nice to know if the registration and insurance is in the same glovebox as the gun) and I tell the occupants to 'leave it there'. Now, if the gun is on the seat next to the driver, I'll usually ask him to step out of the car for the duration of the stop (you can argue all you want, but a loose gun next to the driver is an issue FOR ME).
I've contacted dozens or more people with firearms on their person or in their vehicle. Unless they are the subject of a resonable suspicion detention (discounting normal traffic stops for speed and the like) I don't want to confiscate their firearms, temporarily or otherwise.