traffic stop question

imported post

what if you get pulled over and the cop comes up to you and first thing he says is do you have any drugs or weapons? do you have to answer or can you ask first the reason you are being stopped?

my buddy was pulled over late one night and cop said "do you have any drugs, guns, or hand grenades?" he told him he had a gun and a CCW, and the cop asked for the gun and ran the serial number, and it came back stolen, which it wasn't because he purchased legally as he is a body guard and has a CCW.


even though you may be legal to carry and have the weapon, do you have to answer that question if the officer has no reasonable suspicion you have committed or are about to commit a crime?

imported post

hammer6 wrote:

what if you get pulled over and the cop comes up to you and first thing he says is do you have any drugs or weapons? do you have to answer or can you ask first the reason you are being stopped?

my buddy was pulled over late one night and cop said "do you have any drugs, weapons, or hand grenades?" he told him he had a gun and a CCW, and the cop asked for the gun and ran the serial number, and it came back stolen, which it wasn't because he purchased legally as he is a body guard and has a CCW.


even though you may be legal to carry and have the weapon, do you have to answer that question if the officer has no reasonable suspicion you have committed or are about to commit a crime?

Click to expand...

If an LEO asks, you either have to answer. ( if you are carrying illegally, of course you could plead the 5th but that is going to open another can of worms)

imported post

hammer6 wrote:

what if you get pulled over and the cop comes up to you and first thing he says is do you have any drugs or weapons? do you have to answer or can you ask first the reason you are being stopped?

my buddy was pulled over late one night and cop said "do you have any drugs, weapons, or hand grenades?" he told him he had a gun and a CCW, and the cop asked for the gun and ran the serial number, and it came back stolen, which it wasn't because he purchased legally as he is a body guard and has a CCW.


even though you may be legal to carry and have the weapon, do you have to answer that question if the officer has no reasonable suspicion you have committed or are about to commit a crime?

Click to expand...

You ask "Under what suspicion are you asking for my gun?" Simply having a gun does not give reasonable articulable suspicion, and such is needed in order to conduct a search.

Your friend complied with the officer willfully, and waived his rights. The officer cannot conduct a search just because he wants to. Privacy is a right protected in our constitution.

imported post

acrimsontide wrote:

hammer6 wrote:

what if you get pulled over and the cop comes up to you and first thing he says is do you have any drugs or weapons? do you have to answer or can you ask first the reason you are being stopped?

my buddy was pulled over late one night and cop said "do you have any drugs, weapons, or hand grenades?" he told him he had a gun and a CCW, and the cop asked for the gun and ran the serial number, and it came back stolen, which it wasn't because he purchased legally as he is a body guard and has a CCW.


even though you may be legal to carry and have the weapon, do you have to answer that question if the officer has no reasonable suspicion you have committed or are about to commit a crime?

Click to expand...

If an LEO asks, you either have to answer. ( if you are carrying illegally, of course you could plead the 5th but that is going to open another can of worms)

Click to expand...

Incorrect.

You are under no obligation to answer that or any other question. It is also perfectly legal to say 'No'.

imported post

brboyer wrote:

acrimsontide wrote:

hammer6 wrote:

what if you get pulled over and the cop comes up to you and first thing he says is do you have any drugs or weapons? do you have to answer or can you ask first the reason you are being stopped?

my buddy was pulled over late one night and cop said "do you have any drugs, weapons, or hand grenades?" he told him he had a gun and a CCW, and the cop asked for the gun and ran the serial number, and it came back stolen, which it wasn't because he purchased legally as he is a body guard and has a CCW.


even though you may be legal to carry and have the weapon, do you have to answer that question if the officer has no reasonable suspicion you have committed or are about to commit a crime?

Click to expand...

If an LEO asks, you either have to answer. ( if you are carrying illegally, of course you could plead the 5th but that is going to open another can of worms)

Click to expand...

Incorrect.

You are under no obligation to answer that or any other question. It is also perfectly legal to say 'No'.

Click to expand...

are you sure i can say no? or would i have to ask him under what suspicion is he asking me?

imported post

I got an idea, but it's kind of wacky and out-there.....


Instead of offering opinions on what everyone thinks, why doesn't someone just look at the Florida Code and see if it is a "Duty to Inform" state?

It might just work.

imported post

"How would drugs or weapons help your claim that I was speeding?"

"Am I being detained?"

"I choose not to answer any questions without council."

"You may see my licence and insurance card if you ask politely."
This one works very well for a patdown at 3am.


Just ignore the question and ask your own of him, this way you niether confirm
nor deny anything. And rememer to lock the door behind you when he drags
you out of the car because he doesn't like your attitude.:uhoh:


If you answer him, and lie you can have it used against you. But if you
refuse to answer and he looks anyways, while you may not get your pot back,
it cannot be used against you. Alas the last stement is a perfect world.
Plenty of examples of corrupt judges who could care less in the war on drugs,
and 2A.

If you tell the truth you make him mad, so the only thing that you can
do is keep quite. I proved this one outside Knoxville.:lol:

Remember to ask for a superior when refusing to answer doesn't end
the conversation.

Also if you keep lots of pockets full of stuff, it helps when he wants you to empty your pockets.
I burried his car hood, and he finally told me to get going. Still had 4 pockets to go.:celebrate

imported post

Fallschirmjäger wrote:

I got an idea, but it's kind of wacky and out-there.....


Instead of offering opinions on what everyone thinks, why doesn't someone just look at the Florida Code and see if it is a "Duty to Inform" state?

It might just work.

Click to expand...

it's not. but i'm pretty sure i wouldn't have to answer that question unless he had reasonable suspicion. i have a clean record so i can't see a reason.

imported post

PENALTY FLAGS:*

For everyone who told the OP what to do or could or could not do but didn't help him out byciting a source, giving a quote, or giving a link. The only exception would be the poster who said there is no statute requiring notification. He can't really cite something that doesn't exist.

I am not a lawyer.

Here is a rationale to consider.

If there is no statute requiring notification about a firearm, then onewould think the Bill of Rights, federal and state, become the default settings legally speaking. Whether there is a state statute needs to be verified. I would not hang my finances and freedom on one post on the internet.

If there is no statute, then one might care to apply the Bill of Rights. The 4th and 5th Amendmentswould be the main ones tocome into play in my opinion.

A good place to start learning about exercising 4A and 5A rights is two videos:

Busted by FlexYourRights.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqMjMPlXzdA

Talking to the Police by Prof. James Duane of Regent University Law School.

http://www.regent.edu/admin/media/schlaw/LawPreview/



*From the forum rules:

7) If you state a rule of law, it is incumbant upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when avaiable,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

imported post

hammer6 wrote:

brboyer wrote:

acrimsontide wrote:

hammer6 wrote:

what if you get pulled over and the cop comes up to you and first thing he says is do you have any drugs or weapons? do you have to answer or can you ask first the reason you are being stopped?

my buddy was pulled over late one night and cop said "do you have any drugs, weapons, or hand grenades?" he told him he had a gun and a CCW, and the cop asked for the gun and ran the serial number, and it came back stolen, which it wasn't because he purchased legally as he is a body guard and has a CCW.


even though you may be legal to carry and have the weapon, do you have to answer that question if the officer has no reasonable suspicion you have committed or are about to commit a crime?

Click to expand...

If an LEO asks, you either have to answer. ( if you are carrying illegally, of course you could plead the 5th but that is going to open another can of worms)

Click to expand...

Incorrect.

You are under no obligation to answer that or any other question. It is also perfectly legal to say 'No'.

Click to expand...

are you sure i can say no? or would i have to ask him under what suspicion is he asking me?

Click to expand...

Below is one Florida statue I found on providing false information to a LEO, so it would not be legal to say no if you were asked and had a firearm. It is also against the law to lie to a Federal agent.


837.05 False reports to law enforcement authorities. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever knowingly gives false information to any law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of any crime, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. (2) Whoever knowingly gives false information to a law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of a capital felony, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s.


Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 makes it a crime to: 1) knowingly and willfully; 2) make any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation; 3) in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative or judicial branch of the United States. Your lie does not even have to be made directly to an employee of the national government as long as it is "within the jurisdiction" of the ever expanding federal bureaucracy. Though the falsehood must be "material" this requirement is met if the statement has the "natural tendency to influence or [is] capable of influencing, the decision of the decisionmaking body to which it is addressed." United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 510 (1995). (In other words, it is not necessary to show that your particular lie ever really influenced anyone.) Although you must know that your statement is false at the time you make it in order to be guilty of this crime, you do not have to know that lying to the government is a crime or even that the matter you are lying about is "within the jurisdiction" of a government agency. United States v. Yermian, 468 U.S. 63, 69 (1984). For example, if you lie to your employer on your time and attendance records and, unbeknownst to you, he submits your records, along with those of other employees, to the federal government pursuant to some regulatory duty, you could be criminally liable
Even if you are correct, you probably need to be prepared to stay and "visit" for a while with the officer.

imported post

acrimsontide wrote:

hammer6 wrote:

brboyer wrote:

acrimsontide wrote:

hammer6 wrote:

what if you get pulled over and the cop comes up to you and first thing he says is do you have any drugs or weapons? do you have to answer or can you ask first the reason you are being stopped?

my buddy was pulled over late one night and cop said "do you have any drugs, weapons, or hand grenades?" he told him he had a gun and a CCW, and the cop asked for the gun and ran the serial number, and it came back stolen, which it wasn't because he purchased legally as he is a body guard and has a CCW.


even though you may be legal to carry and have the weapon, do you have to answer that question if the officer has no reasonable suspicion you have committed or are about to commit a crime?

Click to expand...

If an LEO asks, you either have to answer. ( if you are carrying illegally, of course you could plead the 5th but that is going to open another can of worms)

Click to expand...

Incorrect.

You are under no obligation to answer that or any other question. It is also perfectly legal to say 'No'.

Click to expand...

are you sure i can say no? or would i have to ask him under what suspicion is he asking me?

Click to expand...

Below is one Florida statue I found on providing false information to a LEO, so it would not be legal to say no if you were asked and had a firearm. It is also against the law to lie to a Federal agent.


837.05 False reports to law enforcement authorities. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever knowingly gives false information to any law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of any crime, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. (2) Whoever knowingly gives false information to a law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of a capital felony, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s.


Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 makes it a crime to: 1) knowingly and willfully; 2) make any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation; 3) in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative or judicial branch of the United States. Your lie does not even have to be made directly to an employee of the national government as long as it is "within the jurisdiction" of the ever expanding federal bureaucracy. Though the falsehood must be "material" this requirement is met if the statement has the "natural tendency to influence or [is] capable of influencing, the decision of the decisionmaking body to which it is addressed." United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 510 (1995). (In other words, it is not necessary to show that your particular lie ever really influenced anyone.) Although you must know that your statement is false at the time you make it in order to be guilty of this crime, you do not have to know that lying to the government is a crime or even that the matter you are lying about is "within the jurisdiction" of a government agency. United States v. Yermian, 468 U.S. 63, 69 (1984). For example, if you lie to your employer on your time and attendance records and, unbeknownst to you, he submits your records, along with those of other employees, to the federal government pursuant to some regulatory duty, you could be criminally liable
Even if you are correct, you probably need to be prepared to stay and "visit" for a while with the officer.

Click to expand...

right i understand that and i wouldn't lie. let me say it this way- what right does HE have to ask me if i have any drugs or weapons in my car if i only get pulled over for: speeding, stop sign, illegal lane change, red light, etc. especially if i have a clean record and no warrants?

imported post

hammer6 wrote:

SNIP what right does HE have to ask me if i have any drugs or weapons in my car if i only get pulled over for: speeding, stop sign, illegal lane change, red light, etc. especially if i have a clean record and no warrants?

Click to expand...

I am not a lawyer.

We're not all lawyers here, and will not have court opinions and citations at our fingertips for every possible question.

Whether the LEO has a right or authority to ask, you're not going to dissuade him by declaring you don'tthink he has any, especially ifhe thinks he has.

Realize that when you are pulled over for speeding, you are probably "seized" within the meaning of the 4th Amendment.

Whether he has anyauthority to ask, or not, certainly police do ask.

For the time being, learn well your 4th and 5th Amendment rights. They will offer more protection during a traffic stop than knowingthe source of anLEOs authority to ask questions.

Generally, it would seem police may ask all kinds of questions of people to be answered voluntarily, as opposed to beating it out of you. Here is a court opinion excerpt that addresses this point. Even though this exact point is not precisely applicable to your question, I'm providing it because it helps lay some groundwork.

As long as the person to whom questions are put remains free to disregard the questions and walk away, there has been no intrusion upon that person's liberty or privacy as would under the Constitution require some particularized and objective justification. (US vs Mendenhall.)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0446_0544_ZO.html

Now, in a traffic stop, the person is not free to walk away. But I have no information that he is compelled to answer any questions. Further, even duringquestioning after arrest, the arrest-ee has the right to remain silent. See Miranda vs Arizona at the website linked above.

imported post

acrimsontide wrote:

SNIP Below is one Florida statue I found on providing false information to a LEO, so it would not be legal to say no if you were asked and had a firearm. It is also against the law to lie to a Federal agent.


837.05 False reports to law enforcement authorities. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever knowingly gives false information to any law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of any crime, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. (2) Whoever knowingly gives false information to a law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of a capital felony, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s.

Click to expand...

I get a different meaning from it.

Were I to lie that I did not have with me a lawfully carried handgun, I would not be guilty of a violation underthis statute. That's my reading of it anyway. My lawfully carried handgun is not a crime.

Not that it is smart to lie to an LEO. They areprettygood at detecting lies, from what I hear. And figuring out what questions to ask in order to catch the contradictions that mightarise from a lie.

Regarding the federal law, that just burns me tono end. Goddam politicianslie endlessly to the electorate.

imported post

Citizen wrote:

acrimsontide wrote:

SNIP Below is one Florida statue I found on providing false information to a LEO, so it would not be legal to say no if you were asked and had a firearm. It is also against the law to lie to a Federal agent.


837.05 False reports to law enforcement authorities. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever knowingly gives false information to any law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of any crime, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. (2) Whoever knowingly gives false information to a law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of a capital felony, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s.

Click to expand...

I get a different meaning from it.

Were I to lie that I did not have with me a lawfully carried handgun, I would not be guilty of a violation underthis statute. That's my reading of it anyway. My lawfully carried handgun is not a crime.

Not that it is smart to lie to an LEO. They areprettygood at detecting lies, from what I hear. And figuring out what questions to ask in order to catch the contradictions that mightarise from a lie.

Regarding the federal law, that just burns me tono end. Goddam politicianslie endlessly to the electorate.

Click to expand...

alright- 'preciate your help.

imported post

Fallschirmjäger wrote:

I got an idea, but it's kind of wacky and out-there.....


Instead of offering opinions on what everyone thinks, why doesn't someone just look at the Florida Code and see if it is a "Duty to Inform" state?

It might just work.

Click to expand...

You assume that we have not, not a good idea. Florida is not a 'Duty to Inform' state.

imported post

Citizen wrote:

acrimsontide wrote:

SNIP Below is one Florida statue I found on providing false information to a LEO, so it would not be legal to say no if you were asked and had a firearm. It is also against the law to lie to a Federal agent.


837.05 False reports to law enforcement authorities. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whoever knowingly gives false information to any law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of any crime, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. (2) Whoever knowingly gives false information to a law enforcement officer concerning the alleged commission of a capital felony, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s.

Click to expand...

I get a different meaning from it.

Were I to lie that I did not have with me a lawfully carried handgun, I would not be guilty of a violation underthis statute. That's my reading of it anyway. My lawfully carried handgun is not a crime.

Not that it is smart to lie to an LEO. They areprettygood at detecting lies, from what I hear. And figuring out what questions to ask in order to catch the contradictions that mightarise from a lie.

Regarding the federal law, that just burns me tono end. Goddam politicianslie endlessly to the electorate.

Click to expand...

+1

imported post

brboyer wrote:

Fallschirmjäger wrote:

I got an idea, but it's kind of wacky and out-there.....


Instead of offering opinions on what everyone thinks, why doesn't someone just look at the Florida Code and see if it is a "Duty to Inform" state?

It might just work.

Click to expand...

You assume that we have not, not a good idea. Florida is not a 'Duty to Inform' state.

Click to expand...

I asssumed nothing, butt, on the whole, I believe you have. You assumed I didn't know the answer while I knew it before I posted.
Now, can you play 'adult' along with the rest of us?:celebrate

imported post

Fallschirmjäger wrote:

brboyer wrote:

Fallschirmjäger wrote:

I got an idea, but it's kind of wacky and out-there.....


Instead of offering opinions on what everyone thinks, why doesn't someone just look at the Florida Code and see if it is a "Duty to Inform" state?

It might just work.

Click to expand...

You assume that we have not, not a good idea. Florida is not a 'Duty to Inform' state.

Click to expand...

I asssumed nothing, butt, on the whole, I believe you have. You assumed I didn't know the answer while I knew it before I posted.
Now, can you play 'adult' along with the rest of us?:celebrate

Click to expand...

No Thanks, I prefer playing like a child, it's much more fun.

imported post

The original post needs more detail...

Under the auspices of a traffic stop, a police officer is allowed to ask you questions. You are not obligated to answer, however. But if you DO answer, you ought to tell the truth or there are a variety of excuses they can use to charge you, from obstruction, false reporting, etc.

Florida has no gun registration, so there is no legal way for them to 'run the numbers'. All that will show is if a firearm with that serial number has been reported stolen. Many times just the number is taken, and especially with older guns with just a block of numbers, there might be another gun of another make and model out there with the same number. I believe there have even been cases of duplicate numbers issued by the same manufacturer. I purchased a used rifle once and the 'official' serial number on the dealer's inbound FFL form had the part numebr stamped on the bolt--not a serial number but a drawing #--as the firearm. It was a surplus WWII military rifle. as suck, there are about 1 to 2 million rifles out there with that same part number stamped on the bolt ! I pointed this out to the FFL dealer as I was filling out the 4473 and he said that it was the number the gun came to him with and so he had to sell it with that number...

Back to the original post--during a terry stop an officer has the right to secure your weapon temporarily for officer safety--since you are in an auto, if you committed an infraction he observed to warant being stopped, he can then check your license, insurance and registration and any visible checks from the outside of the vehicle--lights, windshield intact, etc. If all observable signs are good to go, he cannot detain you any longer. Once he has checked your papers/license as being valid and run your name to make sure you are not sought on any warrants, that is IT. He needs to return your firearm, issue you a citation if warranted, and cut you loose. 'Running numbers' doesn't enter into it, since there isn't a database to compare your firearm to, and he has no articulable suspicion to believe the gun is stolen.

As for the 'my friend is a bodyguard and has a CCW'--

A CCW is a CCW. It allows you to carry a firearm. It conveys no special powers such as security/bodyguard status. It's kind of like Dale on 'King of The Hill' buying a hat that says 'Bounty Hunter'. Wearing a hat gives you no special powers or status. I've had, while working as an RO in Florida, several instances of peopel carrying CCW's coming in and throwing around the 'bodyguard' title. One claimed it gave him the right to open-carry ANYWHERE in the state, regardless of private property rules. A county sheriff told him to disarm and the man told him 'I am a BODYGUARD, I don't have to obey you. I can open carry anywhere in the state'. He was carrying two Glock 17's in thigh holsters, a semi-auto M-4 Carbine, and a Remington 870 shotgun, along with a half-dozen rifle magazines in a chest pouch plus a bandolier of shotgun ammo, worn over body armor and swat black fatigues. The name 'Sharkman' was written on the back of his kevlar armor (I'm not making this up). He was walking around in public with an overweight girlfriend-looking young lady who was wearing 'Daisy Dukes' and a t-shirt. he claimed she was his 'client' and 'her life was in danger' thus 'he had to be armed like this at all times in case an attempt was made on her life'.

She looked like his girlfriend to me. I asked what she did to cause such a hefty price to be put on her head and he told me it was 'classified'. I kid you not.

The sheriff's deputies at the county range informed him that open carry wasn't legal in Florida, and that if the property agent/manager (in this case, me) asked them to leave, they had to leave or be trespassed.



'Sharkman' took out his CCW--he didn't have a Florida security license or anything a legitimate security guard had--and claimed that the CCW made him exempt from any laws or law enforcement commands.

He got a nice ride downtown. Unfortunately he left his client there, unprotected, but the other deputies promised to watch out for the hoardes of assassins that were undoubtedly stalking her...

Sorry, I degress. Too much caffiene this morning.

imported post

CaptainFinn wrote:

SNIP [A number of commentsregarding things derived fromstatutory and case law.]

Click to expand...

Cites, please.

From the forum rules:

7) If you state a rule of law, it is incumbant upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when avaiable,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

I know whether your statements are accurate. The cites are for all the new folks who don't know, aren't sure, or perhaps already have a confusion from someone else's omission of citations.