imported post
suntzu wrote:
ravonaf wrote:
fire_man2340 wrote:
Now If I tell him that I Have a gun in the car, I dont have to give it to him if he ask for it DO I? And one more thing I DONT have a CWP, can I have my gun in my holster on my side in the OPEN, when I'm driving or not
Yes, you do. If asked for it you have to turn it over for the safety of the LEO.
I thought in Virginia a citizen had the ability to refuse to be disarmed unless the leo had a real, and articulable reason to believe the person was a threat to the leo, or am I wrong?
Careful.
RAS has to do with the courts. And whether they will recognize evidence submitted by police.
Think about it for a moment. Separation of powers. Broadly, the courts cannot dictate to police what the police shall and shall not do, even though its worded like that sometimes.
The judicial can however tell the executive, "We ain't gonna let none of your improperly obtained evidence come before the jury in one of our courts, buster." And,"If you want us to let you use your evidence in a trial in one of our court rooms, here is what you have to do."
Miranda vs Arizona is a good example of this. The court basically laid out very specific details of what they expected.
Here is a case in VA where the court made a decision about whether people could resist an unlawful detention. Its not precisely on point, but it gives a clue to the court's attitude. Especially when they quote a state court in another state.
Thus, recognition of a right to resist an unlawful detention would not advance the rationale supporting the common law right to use reasonable force to resist an unlawful arrest, but would only serve to increase the danger of violence inherent in such detentions.2 "Close questions as to whether an officer possesses articulable suspicion must be resolved in the courtroom and not fought out on the streets." State v. Wiegmann, 714 A.2d 841, 849-50 (Md. 1998) (quoting State v. Blackman, 617 A.2d 619, 630 (Md. App. 1992)). (emphasis added)
http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opnscvwp/1012526.pdf
So, realize that whether the LEO has genuine reason to believe the citizen is a threat is a question that the court is likely going to reserve to itself. Not you.
Also, LEO229 quoted a federal circuit court opinion some time back that, if I recall, permitted police to seize any gun in a traffic stop for officer safety. I never kept the link to the opinion, so I can't make a firm statement about it.