Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 43

Thread: Anyone Catch "Washington's Most Wanted" Last Night?

  1. #1
    Regular Member kwiebe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, United States
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    It was on the Fox affiliate after the All-Star Game. They had a segment on how to handle a traffic stop if you're carrying in your car (w/CPL). The segment didn't mention OC, but I thought it was interesting how it explained what to do and what to expect. Inlcuded an Everett PD officer.

    The segment basically said, among other things, that after you've volunteered your CPL and told the officer you're carrying, the officer may take your handgun during the stop (officer safety issue).

    I just wondered if anyone else caught it and if that's common for a traffic stop.

    You can watch the video here:

    WMW Video

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762

    Post imported post

    Is that a Prius behind that SUV?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska, USA
    Posts
    584

    Post imported post

    Throughout the video the guy just kept saying comply, they never mentioned that anything was law as far as I'm concerned if the officer can't see my weapon I don't have one and I'm not going to announce that I have one. A lot of times the officer already knows you have a cpl before pulling you over and if he doesn't you don't need to make him nervous by telling him you have a weapon.

  4. #4
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953

    Post imported post

    kwiebe wrote:
    The segment basically said, among other things, that after you've volunteered your CPL and told the officer you're carrying, the officer may take your handgun during the stop (officer safety issue).
    Over the years I have carried a firearm (over 40 now) I have been stopped three times. Each time I volunteered that I had a firearm while showing my driver's license and CPL (Previously a Concealed Weapon Permit). In NO instance was I asked to surrender my weapon. Officer asked where it was and then said to "leave it there, don't touch it".

    FWIW, none of the stops resulted in tickets, just warnings.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    130

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    Is that a Prius behind that SUV?
    I think it was Everett Police have one for there public relations officer. King 5 did a story on them going green last year.
    WTT: Glock 27 for Glock 26

  6. #6
    Regular Member j2l3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    871

    Post imported post

    They are implying that you have to tell the officer you are armed. There is no requirement in this state to do so.
    CZ 75B 9mm, Ruger P94 .40 S&W, Bersa Thunder .380, AR-15 Homebuild

  7. #7
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    .....and don't just comply.....
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  8. #8
    Regular Member MadHatter66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    320

    Post imported post

    I for one am appalled...This video is designed to give people that don't know any better the information that LE wants you to have, not the actual law. Never once do either of them mention that you are under no obligation to advise that you are armed. What happens when he wants to cuff you for a simple speeding ticket because you are armed? Or when he decides that he is going to go into your glove box for you firearm? I for one think this video is nothing more then propaganda, designed to make people believe that you lose some of your other rights for the right to be armed...

  9. #9
    Regular Member kwiebe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, United States
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    MadHatter66 wrote:
    I for one am appalled...This video is designed to give people that don't know any better the information that LE wants you to have, not the actual law. Never once do either of them mention that you are under no obligation to advise that you are armed. What happens when he wants to cuff you for a simple speeding ticket because you are armed? Or when he decides that he is going to go into your glove box for you firearm? I for one think this video is nothing more then propaganda, designed to make people believe that you lose some of your other rights for the right to be armed...
    That was pretty much my take, too. Very one-sided but I guess I'm not surprised.

  10. #10
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    I found him on Facebook and sent him a message about his video and my dislike of it.

    http://www.facebook.com/people/Myrle-Carner/803951434

  11. #11
    Regular Member MadHatter66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    320

    Post imported post

    I sent an email to Q13...

    As an armed citizen I am appalled at your video for this story. You are under no obligation in Washington State to advise law enforcement that you are armed, if you are carrying legally, and with a valid CPL. This video would have the average person that is carrying a firearm legally to think that this is an obligation. By asking someone to step out of the car and taking their firearm you are violating their 4th amendment rights under the pretext of “officer safety.” I think that as a program that upholds the law, and helps take criminals off the streets you should be more proactive about telling people about their rights, and not what LE wants you to do. The police would love it if we all gave up our rights, they would have a much easier time. What happens when the officer wants to take the firearm from you glove box himself? He is now entering a closed container without a warrant, and if you don’t give permission you are presumed guilty of something. I would hope that Q13 would correct this story to reflect the law, and not what the cops want. This is not a “us vs. them” argument, but one that keeps law enforcement from violating the rights of others. What happens when law enforcement shows up at Q13 and wants you to stop broadcasting? Isn’t that a violation of your rights as a news organization? No one would stand for that. So why does an organization that is deeply rooted in 1st amendment rights have such disregard to the 2nd and 4th amendment rights of the people? Armed citizens do night give up other rights in order to be armed, so why put something on the air that would lead people to believe that?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    j2l3 wrote:
    They are implying that you have to tell the officer you are armed.* There is no requirement in this state to do so.
    There is no requirement to do so, however not doing so can often make a big deal out of a non-issue if you had just chosen to inform.


    Now, let's take you down a few roads. Lets say you do tell him you are armed. Two things can happen. Either you are given a "ok, just don't make any sudden movements," speech, and then thanked for being respectful. Or you are given a "step out," and a pat down. Your gun is then returned to you. I can tell you the first is FAR more often going to happen.

    Now let's go down the road where you don't say you are armed. You give the officer your license. He runs your name, finds out you have a CPL. At this point, one of two things goes through his mind. A) Why didn't he tell me, and B) is he trying to hide that he's armed.

    So the officer now has that to consider when he's thinking about whether or not you get a ticket. That thought can often be "He didn't extend me any courtesy, why should I extend him any?"

    Now let's say the officer wants to figure out if you are indeed armed, or if you just have your CPL but aren't armed. So he goes back up and asks you. Now you have two options. Either answer truthfully, or lie.

    If you answer truthfully, two things can happened. You can be questioned on why you didn't tell the officer sooner, or you become detained and frisked.

    If you lie, two things can happen. You can possible get away with it, or you can be detained (maybe you're printing, made a furtive movement w/o knowing it...etc. Standard for RAS is pretty low, just remember), frisked, weapon found, and now you've entered the criminal violation world. Obstruction and making false statements. Not good. Maybe you'll get off on those too.

    Or maybe you act reasonably, recognizing that every traffic stop an officer conducts is dangerous, and decide to extend a courtesy by informing the officer that you are lawfully armed.

    Just remember, officers have a lot of discretion on whether or not a ticket gets issued during a traffic stop. Next time you decide to press your rights on the officer, just remember that when you come in here posting about what a dick the officer was.

    Black and white execution of the law on your part will often yield black and white response on the officer. That's what discretion is about.

  13. #13
    Regular Member j2l3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    871

    Post imported post

    The discussion is on what is missing from the report.
    CZ 75B 9mm, Ruger P94 .40 S&W, Bersa Thunder .380, AR-15 Homebuild

  14. #14
    Regular Member kwiebe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, United States
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    Good letter MadHatter66 ^^^^^^^^^^

    I like the First Amendment analogy too. But one thing I've come to realize recently: I used to think the nightmare scenario would include the govt strong-arming media outlets or shutting them down. Now I realize the true nightmare scenario is the govt not having to even do that at all.

  15. #15
    Regular Member kwiebe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, United States
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    BigDaddy5

    The question I have is why should a traffic stop of a law-abiding citizen who happens to be carrying be considered any more dangerous than any other traffic stop? In fact, you could probably even argue that it's less dangerous.

    I understand the LEO is human and may wonder "why didn't he tell me" and so forth, but that's really not the law-abiding citizen's problem. That's a non-recognition-of-rights problem on the part of the LEO.

    Hand him a pamphlet that covers the Constitutional Amendment process?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    kwiebe wrote:
    BigDaddy5

    The question I have is why should a traffic stop of a law-abiding citizen who happens to be carrying be considered any more dangerous than any other traffic stop?* In fact, you could probably even argue that it's less dangerous.

    I understand the LEO is human and may wonder "why didn't he tell me" and so forth, but that's really not the law-abiding citizen's problem.* That's a non-recognition-of-rights problem on the part of the LEO.

    Hand him a pamphlet that covers the Constitutional Amendment process?
    No, it's not a non-recognition-of-rights. It's a common curiosity. Reasonable people who carry firearms will tell a police officer they are armed, it's as simple as that. People who don't tell officers they are armed often have things to hide. Note: I said "Often," I did not say always. I know how you guys can be hyenas when people don't follow the hardline.

    Guess what, gang's have members who hold CPL's too. A CPL isn't an automatic "good guy vs. bad guy" check anymore.

    The traffic stop isn't any more dangerous. The initial approach is what's the most dangerous. It's at that point that an officer may not know you have a CPL or a weapon. And then you don't tell the officer, but hand him your license. He returns to his vehicle, runs your name and now knows for sure you have a CPL. The probability of you being armed is greater, and now your hiding it.

    And I never said you had to tell the officer you are armed. Hand him a pamphlet on the constitutional process, he'll probably hand you a notice of infraction back. I said act reasonably, and your odds of being treated more respectfully and not receiving a ticket are increased.

    Hence what I said at the end: feel free to push your rights to the limit, just remember that when you think the officer is being a dick for pushing the law (i.e. frisking when you make a furtive movement, or actually citing you for everything you did instead of cutting you a break). If you act reasonably, the officer is more likely to do the same.

    Voluntarily informing the officer you are armed is not a violation of your rights (hence the "voluntary" part), and it's not something you have to do. But it's reasonable, and will often get a reasonable response back.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    286

    Post imported post

    BigDaddy5 wrote
    Now let's say the officer wants to figure out if you are indeed armed, or if you just have your CPL but aren't armed. So he goes back up and asks you. Now you have two options. Either answer truthfully, or lie.
    Or you could simple answer that you choose not to answer their question. There's nothing that says you have to answer every question the police ask you. Yes, they could ask you to step out of the vehicle, they might even search you (do not consent of course).

    The whole, just go along with it to make things easier on yourself attitude, really gets to me for some reason. It's how things start moving in the wrong direction.
    DISCLAIMER: This post may contain libertarian ideas and language that are consistent with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, including a belief in liberty, rule of law, and natural rights. It may also contain opinions critical of government and the tyrannies being committed by such. If you are an authoritarian, statist, or other freedom hater, side effects of reading this post may include high blood pressure, loose stool, severe genital itching, and diarrhea of the mouth.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington, USA
    Posts
    286

    Post imported post

    BigDaddy5 wrote:
    or actually citing you for everything you did instead of cutting you a break). If you act reasonably, the officer is more likely to do the same.
    I've got no problem with the officer giving me a ticket if I actually did break the law. Here's a simple solution, don't break the law. And if you do, be prepared for the consequences.
    DISCLAIMER: This post may contain libertarian ideas and language that are consistent with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, including a belief in liberty, rule of law, and natural rights. It may also contain opinions critical of government and the tyrannies being committed by such. If you are an authoritarian, statist, or other freedom hater, side effects of reading this post may include high blood pressure, loose stool, severe genital itching, and diarrhea of the mouth.

  19. #19
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241

    Post imported post

    BigDaddy5 wrote:
    There is no requirement to do so, however not doing so can often make a big deal out of a non-issue if you had just chosen to inform.

    Now, let's take you down a few roads. Lets say you do tell him you are armed. Two things can happen. Either you are given a "ok, just don't make any sudden movements," speech, and then thanked for being respectful. Or you are given a "step out," and a pat down. Your gun is then returned to you. I can tell you the first is FAR more often going to happen.

    Now let's go down the road where you don't say you are armed. You give the officer your license. He runs your name, finds out you have a CPL. At this point, one of two things goes through his mind. A) Why didn't he tell me, and B) is he trying to hide that he's armed.

    So the officer now has that to consider when he's thinking about whether or not you get a ticket. That thought can often be "He didn't extend me any courtesy, why should I extend him any?"

    Now let's say the officer wants to figure out if you are indeed armed, or if you just have your CPL but aren't armed. So he goes back up and asks you. Now you have two options. Either answer truthfully, or lie.

    If you answer truthfully, two things can happened. You can be questioned on why you didn't tell the officer sooner, or you become detained and frisked.

    If you lie, two things can happen. You can possible get away with it, or you can be detained (maybe you're printing, made a furtive movement w/o knowing it...etc. Standard for RAS is pretty low, just remember), frisked, weapon found, and now you've entered the criminal violation world. Obstruction and making false statements. Not good. Maybe you'll get off on those too.

    Or maybe you act reasonably, recognizing that every traffic stop an officer conducts is dangerous, and decide to extend a courtesy by informing the officer that you are lawfully armed.

    Just remember, officers have a lot of discretion on whether or not a ticket gets issued during a traffic stop. Next time you decide to press your rights on the officer, just remember that when you come in here posting about what a dick the officer was.

    Black and white execution of the law on your part will often yield black and white response on the officer. That's what discretion is about.
    Are you the Officer in the Video?
    Im proudly straight. I'm free to not support Legalization, GLBT, Illegal Aliens, or the Islamization of America.

  20. #20
    Regular Member kwiebe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, United States
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    kenshin wrote:
    BigDaddy5 wrote
    Now let's say the officer wants to figure out if you are indeed armed, or if you just have your CPL but aren't armed. So he goes back up and asks you. Now you have two options. Either answer truthfully, or lie.
    Or you could simple answer that you choose not to answer their question. There's nothing that says you have to answer every question the police ask you. Yes, they could ask you to step out of the vehicle, they might even search you (do not consent of course).

    The whole, just go along with it to make things easier on yourself attitude, really gets to me for some reason. It's how things start moving in the wrong direction.
    Exactly. It's sheeple-think.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    jbone wrote:
    Are you the Officer in the Video?
    Nope, not at all. Further, I don't what you decide to do during a traffic stop, as this thread was about. I just said that every action has a consequence. And that consequence can be as much as being frisked, and detained. Or getting a ticket. Or receiving a "have a nice day." It all depends on what you do. If you choose the hardline, then don't expect many breaks, that's all.

  22. #22
    Regular Member MadHatter66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    320

    Post imported post

    BigDaddy5 wrote:
    j2l3 wrote:
    They are implying that you have to tell the officer you are armed.* There is no requirement in this state to do so.
    There is no requirement to do so, however not doing so can often make a big deal out of a non-issue if you had just chosen to inform.


    Now, let's take you down a few roads. Lets say you do tell him you are armed. Two things can happen. Either you are given a "ok, just don't make any sudden movements," speech, and then thanked for being respectful. Or you are given a "step out," and a pat down. Your gun is then returned to you. I can tell you the first is FAR more often going to happen.

    Now let's go down the road where you don't say you are armed. You give the officer your license. He runs your name, finds out you have a CPL. At this point, one of two things goes through his mind. A) Why didn't he tell me, and B) is he trying to hide that he's armed.

    So the officer now has that to consider when he's thinking about whether or not you get a ticket. That thought can often be "He didn't extend me any courtesy, why should I extend him any?"

    Now let's say the officer wants to figure out if you are indeed armed, or if you just have your CPL but aren't armed. So he goes back up and asks you. Now you have two options. Either answer truthfully, or lie.
    here is the main problem with your argument... Cops dont run for CPL's unless there is a REASON to run them... They dont come up on your drivers, and they dont come up in the WACIC/NCIC system either. The are a separate run through DOL, and I have never EVER run a CPL for a traffic stop. I am a dispatcher, and have run HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of traffic stops. So you argument of "if he runs you for a CPL" doesnt hold any water. Even is he does, for the sake of your argument, a CPL doesn't mean that you are carrying. Kind of like having a drivers license doesn't automatically mean that you are driving.

    Black and white execution of the law on your part will often yield black and white response on the officer. That's what discretion is about.
    I would take a speeding ticket over a violation of my rights any day

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    100

    Post imported post

    MadHatter66 wrote:
    They dont come up on your drivers, and they dont come up in the WACIC/NCIC system either. The are a separate run through DOL, and I have never EVER run a CPL for a traffic stop. I am a dispatcher, and have run HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of traffic stops.
    No, that's not correct. I don't know how you access through your screens, but on an Officer's MDC/MDT, nearly every system in WA has a simple check-box for CPL, at least for every major department. Unless your system is not set up to access DOL for CPL's, then you are right.

    If you want to discuss that aspect further, PM me.

    If you want more verification about that, check the thread about the poster's ride-along with Kirkland PD.

  24. #24
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241

    Post imported post

    BigDaddy5 wrote:
    jbone wrote:
    Are you the Officer in the Video?
    Nope, not at all. Further, I don't what you decide to do during a traffic stop, as this thread was about. I just said that every action has a consequence. And that consequence can be as much as being frisked, and detained. Or getting a ticket. Or receiving a "have a nice day." It all depends on what you do. If you choose the hardline, then don't expect many breaks, that's all.
    I don't get the sense of offering. He doesn't know unless you tell, he has no reason to know so why tell, why escalate a simple burnt out left turn blinker stop. The only part of the video were it will come up anyway is the dude had the gun in plain view on the seat. If your Concealed than why offer, the officer is safer with our gun safely stowed. The officer safety stuff is s power play on their part. What if you have no firearm on you and he demands to see your CPL because checks reveal you've been issued one, or you gona show him then also?
    Im proudly straight. I'm free to not support Legalization, GLBT, Illegal Aliens, or the Islamization of America.

  25. #25
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    .......never volunteer information to the so called authorities.....
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

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
  •