Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 74

Thread: If a cop wants to disarm you...

  1. #1
    Regular Member Bowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Grand Forks, North Dakota, USA
    Posts
    46

    If a cop wants to disarm you...

    I havn't had a LEO encounter yet, but I'm assuming it's not if but when. So, if they ask to disarm me, (or any OC'r) you know, for "officer safety", what do you do? All I've ever heard or seen is people letting LEO take the guns of the holster, inspect, run the permit yada yada yada, then put the gun back in. What if I don't want the LEO disarming me? Can I say "No sir, I would rather you not take my gun". Anyone have any thoughts on this? I always think of saying you can take my gun if I can take yours. But again, don't really know.

    btw been CC'ing for 4 years, started open carrying about a year ago, in ND and MN.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Coded-Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Roseville
    Posts
    317
    In california cops have the legal right to check and make sure the gun is unloaded(since we can only open carry unloaded firearms). So you will need to make sure you are not breaking the law by denying the officer something he is legally able to do.
    If guns cause crime.....mine must be defective.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Coded-Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Roseville
    Posts
    317
    absoultely. I merely gave an example of a legal precedence in which an officer can disarm you. Not familiar with ND firearm laws, he may have to present a permit or license or gun. just trying to iterate one needs to be certain of what is/isn't required when out and about with a firearm.
    If guns cause crime.....mine must be defective.

  4. #4
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    Pretty bad when we have to strategize encounters with police officers in America.
    Ain't that the truth. Police are pretty darned good at determining body language and profiling good guys from bad guys (regardless of what some people think about profiling, it is a fact of life and we all do it). It is amazing to me that we have some parts of the country where if officers saw an armed person out in public, their approach is very aggressive, up to and including physical force when the armed individual is doing nothing to warrant such behavior.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Hey, they strategize encounters too.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830
    Quote Originally Posted by Coded-Dude View Post
    In california cops have the legal right to check and make sure the gun is unloaded(since we can only open carry unloaded firearms). So you will need to make sure you are not breaking the law by denying the officer something he is legally able to do.
    It is important for everyone in all parts of the country to understand that California's laws are unconstitutional, and by federal color of law statutes, arguably a felony to enforce. The tyrants who voted for these laws, and the tyrants who enforce them are ****** of oppression. Considering that no law which defies the consitution is even technically a law, it is quite important for the overall intelligence of everyone to clarify that the police get away with illegally and abusively violating people's rights, and will continue to do so until properly taken to task in court. Police have NO legal right to do a damn thing without RAS as described in Terry v Ohio, unless that have probable cause or a warrant. Nor do they have a right to defy the Bill Of Rights. Don't sell yourself short and fall into the trap of thinking you're a servant to the state. The Government is YOUR servant, and you as their boss badly need to discipline them.

    One other comment in regards to what NavyLT said, it is in some circumstances lawful to resist unlawful police actions. For the sake of a publicity nightmare and the great risk of death, it should never be done except when lives are desperately at stake. I would also add that if the cop is acting in good faith of a bad warrant, or can later articulate a believeable yet incorrect understanding of the law, it is legal for them to stop you, and illegal for you to resist. Although the best bet is never to attempt this, those who are interested should research it further, and for the sake of not causing controversy and locked threads should avoid discussing it here.
    Last edited by Michigander; 11-03-2010 at 04:18 PM.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  7. #7
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by Bowers View Post
    I havn't had a LEO encounter yet, but I'm assuming it's not if but when. So, if they ask to disarm me, (or any OC'r) you know, for "officer safety", what do you do? All I've ever heard or seen is people letting LEO take the guns of the holster, inspect, run the permit yada yada yada, then put the gun back in. What if I don't want the LEO disarming me? Can I say "No sir, I would rather you not take my gun". Anyone have any thoughts on this? I always think of saying you can take my gun if I can take yours. But again, don't really know.

    btw been CC'ing for 4 years, started open carrying about a year ago, in ND and MN.
    I've heard two different responses that I rather like....

    First, upon REQUEST of the potential OPINION ENFORCEMENT OFFICER (OEO), "No thanks, My holstered firearm is just fine where it is without UNNEEDED manipulation and potential for a negligent discharge."

    Second, same parameters at the first, "Officer, may I disarm you FOR MY SAFETY?"

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    If the stop is lawful, the officer may disarm you for his safety. You may not disarm him. I don't recommend snarky responses when he seeks to disarm you. I do recommend not consenting, but not resisting, with those motivations made crystal clear.

    But, then, I try to stay out of spitting contests with other, potentially hostile, armed folks. You can fix anything but dead.

  9. #9
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    If the stop is lawful, the officer may disarm you for his safety. You may not disarm him. I don't recommend snarky responses when he seeks to disarm you. I do recommend not consenting, but not resisting, with those motivations made crystal clear.

    But, then, I try to stay out of spitting contests with other, potentially hostile, armed folks. You can fix anything but dead.
    With regard to your first sentence.... that MAY vary upon jurisdiction. Even TERRY I believe specifies "ARMED AND DANGEROUS" not "armed OR dangerous".

  10. #10
    Regular Member Bowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Grand Forks, North Dakota, USA
    Posts
    46
    So, if I verbally resisted, could he slap me with some kind of obstruction charge?

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Bowers View Post
    So, if I verbally resisted, could he slap me with some kind of obstruction charge?
    I don't know what verbal resistance is. Generally, if a LEO (actually, when a LEO) tries to violate my rights, I inform him of my lack of consent, but I do not resist. That is not verbal resistance. In fact, some here have accused me of being too compliant.

    If by "verbally resisting" you mean saying no, I suspect that the next step from the LEO will be more forceful and that the amount of force and the number of LEOs will increase until your saying no has no more impact on the situation. If you physically resist the lowest level of force being used by the officer to effect his orders, and if the stop and orders are lawful, then yes, you will face some charges.

    Bottom line, clearly and verbally express your lack of consent, but do not physically resist.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Unloaded is disarmed!

    Quote Originally Posted by Coded-Dude View Post
    absoultely. I merely gave an example of a legal precedence in which an officer can disarm you..
    Unloaded is disarmed.

    Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits (lets Dude off the hook) and guns and the truth.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Bowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Grand Forks, North Dakota, USA
    Posts
    46
    I guess I just meant what you already said, which is making it clear I don't want him to take my gun, but only verbally. Obviously I'm not going to try and physically stop a LEO from taking my gun, because I don't want to be tazed or shot anytime soon.

    so the long and short of it is that all I can do is say "I don't consent to a search/having my gun taken" or some version of that, but if he still wants it, really nothing I can do.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Bowers View Post
    I guess I just meant what you already said, which is making it clear I don't want him to take my gun, but only verbally. Obviously I'm not going to try and physically stop a LEO from taking my gun, because I don't want to be tazed or shot anytime soon.

    so the long and short of it is that all I can do is say "I don't consent to a search/having my gun taken" or some version of that, but if he still wants it, really nothing I can do.
    That's good to hear. I read some blustering here from time to time about how some will deal with a LEO, trying to "win" the encounter because the law is on their side. I worry that they will soon turn the situation into one in which the law is on the side of the LEO.

    I refused to consent when I was stopped, but offered no resistance. The LEO (LEOs, actually, three of them, including a captain) probably walked away from the situation with their chests puffed out, thinking they had "won" the confrontation with an open carrier. However, the result of my encounter was my receiving two apologies and the policy of the city changing. I'd say that OC "won."

    If I had tried to "win" the encounter, there would have been a lot of "losing" going on for all concerned.

  15. #15
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    That's good to hear. I read some blustering here from time to time about how some will deal with a LEO, trying to "win" the encounter because the law is on their side. I worry that they will soon turn the situation into one in which the law is on the side of the LEO.

    I refused to consent when I was stopped, but offered no resistance. The LEO (LEOs, actually, three of them, including a captain) probably walked away from the situation with their chests puffed out, thinking they had "won" the confrontation with an open carrier. However, the result of my encounter was my receiving two apologies and the policy of the city changing. I'd say that OC "won."

    If I had tried to "win" the encounter, there would have been a lot of "losing" going on for all concerned.
    Its not about winning it's about being left alone and standing up for your rights.

    I won't settle for an apology, do they settle for an apology when you get a ticket for speeding? I will only settle when they change their behavior.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Its not about winning it's about being left alone and standing up for your rights.

    I won't settle for an apology, do they settle for an apology when you get a ticket for speeding? I will only settle when they change their behavior.
    Guess what? They changed their behavior.

    Um, that was my point.

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Guess what? They changed their behavior.

    Um, that was my point.
    But why did they have to walk away with chests puffed out first? :roll eyes:

    Me I'd rather not let them "win" as you say it when they are wrong.
    LEO across this country need to be retrained to treat the public they serve with respect, to make damn sure someone is breaking a law before they harass them.
    Why should we expect anything less?

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    But why did they have to walk away with chests puffed out first? :roll eyes:

    Me I'd rather not let them "win" as you say it when they are wrong.
    LEO across this country need to be retrained to treat the public they serve with respect, to make damn sure someone is breaking a law before they harass them.
    Why should we expect anything less?
    You can handle the situation however you wish. I would just strongly advise others against turning the situation into a spitting contest. Be polite, protect your rights, allow the situation to play out. You can fix things later, to the benefit of all OCers, if you don't make yourself and your actions the issue.

    Moving on.
    Last edited by eye95; 11-07-2010 at 08:57 AM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    You can handle the situation however you wish. I would just strongly advise others against turning the situation into a spitting contest. Be polite, protect your rights, allow the situation to play out. You can fix things later, to the benefit of all OCers, if you don't make yourself and your actions the issue.

    Moving on.
    I am polite and I do not get angry. But I am firm against intrusions by our public servants. No matter how obnoxious and provocative they they are.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Let him. Cops can do whatever they want. Judges don't give a crap about about your rights and that is shown in lenient sentences given cops. If you want to refuse to be disarmed that is your choice, just understand that cops won't think twice about shooting you. Rod Tuason said he would prone someone out and shoot if they twitched. The poor man at Costco a few months ago. The guy in CA at the BART station. The guy in NY with the wallet. The rap guy who was shot after his wedding. I don't agree, but that is how cops and the system operates.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    You can handle the situation however you wish. I would just strongly advise others against turning the situation into a spitting contest. Be polite, protect your rights, allow the situation to play out. You can fix things later, to the benefit of all OCers, if you don't make yourself and your actions the issue.

    Moving on.

    Uh Oh, you didn't ask if you were free to move on, before moving on.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    62
    Here in Cali, these LEO do not care if you do not want to be stopped and have your weapon checked, they only care that if they do stop and check someone's weapon, that the weapon holder is acting within the law. Verbal objection to surrendering one's weapon is okay as long as it is done respectfully. Just know folks, here in Cali, if they want to check....LET THEM CHECK....

  23. #23
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    The most important thing I can add to this it simply, To resist will get you Tazed, arrested, and charged. objecting without resistance will not. It is best to argue the fourth amendment in court not at the scene. remember, anything you say can and will be used against you, so do not say anything beyond "I do not consent to any search and seizure nor will I answer any questions, however i will not resist." this is the only thing you should ever say to the police, and every time you say it, it should be followed with, "am I now free to go?"

    One last word of caution, never, ever unholster your firearm. If the police want you disarmed, insist that they be the ones to unholster your firearm. If you are ordered to unholster it yourself, and refuse, an obstruction charge would be dismissed if it's based on you refusal to unholster yourself. You're lawyer will argue that you were acting in the best interests of your safety as well as the officers.

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    I do recommend not consenting, but not resisting, with those motivations made crystal clear.
    "I capitulate to your use of force, but do not consent."

    ?

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    I've heard two different responses that I rather like....

    First, upon REQUEST of the potential OPINION ENFORCEMENT OFFICER (OEO), "No thanks, My holstered firearm is just fine where it is without UNNEEDED manipulation and potential for a negligent discharge."

    Second, same parameters at the first, "Officer, may I disarm you FOR MY SAFETY?"
    It may sound funny in Reader's Digest, but I assure you the LEO won't think either are a bit funny.

    I'd probably respond to a request that I hand him my firearm with, "It's a foreign make, and a bit tricky. May I unload it for you?"

    Reflecting on it a bit, both times I was asked during traffic stops to disarm, law enforcement had me unload the firearm and show them both the clip and the empty chamber. This is standard gun safety 101 procedure, so unless you're forceably resisting (or being a smart-alec), you'll probably be handing them an unloaded firearm, not a loaded one.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •