Traffic Stop Scenario

Munkey Butt · Feb 7, 2013

So a while back I asked the question "Do you tell LEO your armed in a traffic stop". Now a new question arises. This is somewhat of a multi-part question.

So say you're stopped by an LEO, and for argument sake you are OC in a holster (w/ CPL) and you do not announce you're armed. Now somewhere during the stop, LEO asks if there are any weapons or firearms in the car.

What would your response be?

Now say that you respond with a "Yes, firearm is holstered on my hip." I would hope that the LEO would leave it at that.

NOTE- this is the main question I am asking.

If said LEO is pushes the issue and asks for you to unholster your firearm and hand it over.

What is your response/ action?

This is somewhat of an experiance i had, to save hassle I wish to keep the details to myself. Id just like to know what I am legally obligated to do. On the other hand I would like to what my rights are to retain my weapon.

Someone on here said something like "the safest place for my weapon is in my holster not handled by anyone".

Anyways folks thanks in advance for all your input.

DCKilla · Feb 7, 2013

I do my best not to get pulled over. My wife would disagree. Besides that, the fourth amendment should protect you in most cases. You haven't committed a crime. I think there was a court decision about officer safety. Somebody else will have to cite that to confirm. Keeping your mouth shut is always best if pulled over. If off body, I suggest keeping papers and firearm separate.

Difdi · Feb 7, 2013

If the officer runs the serial number on every lawfully-carried gun he runs across, would telling him you have one when he asks be self-incrimination?

Munkey Butt · Feb 7, 2013

Well i dont believe Lying would be the correct response to his questions. If he directly asks are you going to say no?

If you're reaching for your paperwork and he sees it, how would that scenario play out?
I am mainly looking for rear encounters or well thought out theoretical scenarios. If asked this question I do not want to reply with a smart ass'd remark, but rather a knowledgeable response in a respectful manor, as to say "I'm not waving my rights, nor am I letting you walk all over them".

DCKilla · Feb 7, 2013

If an LEO pulled me over and saw I was armed and asked to hand over my pistol for officer safety. I would have my recorder on and say "I do not give consent to seizure of my property."

Flopsweat · Feb 7, 2013

I got this typed up, proofread it, and changed it completely. Then I refreshed the page and you guys had said about what I was going to say. Aw heck with it, I've got at least one new thing in there.

I'd tell him I'm not comfortable with him handling my gun. And that I do not consent to any searches or seizures. If he insists on taking it I won't resist. I'd rather skip the arguing and handcuffing part and just let an attorney explain how I had my voice recorder running the entire time the accused was violating my rights. If he in fact was. You never know what he may have just heard over the radio.

bmg50cal · Feb 7, 2013

Don't do things to get pulled over.
Be polite.
Don't answer questions.
Don't submit to any searches.

OC for ME · Feb 7, 2013

Munkey Butt said:
So a while back I asked the question "Do you tell LEO your armed in a traffic stop". Now a new question arises. This is somewhat of a multi-part question.

So say you're stopped by an LEO, and for argument sake you are OC in a holster (w/ CPL) and you do not announce you're armed. Now somewhere during the stop, LEO asks if there are any weapons or firearms in the car.

What would your response be?

Now say that you respond with a "Yes, firearm is holstered on my hip." I would hope that the LEO would leave it at that.

NOTE- this is the main question I am asking.

If said LEO is pushes the issue and asks for you to unholster your firearm and hand it over.

What is your response/ action?

This is somewhat of an experience i had, to save hassle I wish to keep the details to myself. Id just like to know what I am legally obligated to do. On the other hand I would like to what my rights are to retain my weapon.

Someone on here said something like "the safest place for my weapon is in my holster not handled by anyone".

Anyways folks thanks in advance for all your input.

Read the relevant state law and state case law on this matter. If you comply with the law you are on firm legal ground. This places the cop in legal peril if he is found to not have been on firm legal ground. Maybe some of the other folks around here are familiar with your "local" LEAs and their "understanding" of the applicable laws.

I will not "handle" my firearm in the presence of a cop. Expect bad things to happen to you.

skeith5 · Feb 7, 2013

I'll try and look up the cite when I get to a computer. My understanding is that the state supreme court has ruled that an officer removing your firearm for officer safely does not violate the 4th. I haven't been pulled over in years, long before carrying on a normal basis. That's a good way to avoid the issue.

davidmcbeth · Feb 7, 2013

Why? Is your gun further proof of your speeding?

Jeff Hayes · Feb 7, 2013

I never speak to Cops when they pull me over, I do not tell them where I have been, where I am going, how fast I was going, tell them why I think they stopped me. I have done this several times, as soon as the first question is asked I simply respond with my attorney has instructed me to never chat with Law Enforcement, it confuses them for a minute or two but them they will either write you a ticket or let you go. I also hand them an assertion of rights card.

MSG Laigaie · Feb 7, 2013

bmg50cal said:
[1]Don't do things to get pulled over.
[2]Be polite.
[3]Don't answer questions.
[4]Don't submit to any searches.

1. This is Truth...but I drive with my wife and SHE gets pulled over on occasion.

2. You get what you give....but do not be a 'pushover'.

3. I answer questions with questions now. "give me your weapon".."Why would I want to do that officer?" and so on

4. Target word here is Submit. "I do not consent..." and "I will not resist..." and "are you sure you want to test the law tonight?..."

acmariner99 · Feb 7, 2013

I am very happy to say that I have never been pulled over while armed. If I was I would simply keep my mouth shut. If he asks if there are weapons I won't lie and if he asks to take possession of it/them, I will say I do not consent to any search or seizure. I may be tempted to ask "my weapon is 'here' and is properly holstered and/or secured, don't you think it is safer for all parties where it is?" - I have no idea how well that would go over though.

Citizen · Feb 7, 2013

Munkey Butt said:
SNIP So a while back I asked the question "Do you tell LEO your armed in a traffic stop". Now a new question arises. This is somewhat of a multi-part question.

So say you're stopped by an LEO, and for argument sake you are OC in a holster (w/ CPL) and you do not announce you're armed. Now somewhere during the stop, LEO asks if there are any weapons or firearms in the car.

What would your response be?

Now say that you respond with a "Yes, firearm is holstered on my hip." I would hope that the LEO would leave it at that.

NOTE- this is the main question I am asking.

If said LEO is pushes the issue and asks for you to unholster your firearm and hand it over.

What is your response/ action?

This is somewhat of an experiance i had, to save hassle I wish to keep the details to myself. Id just like to know what I am legally obligated to do. On the other hand I would like to what my rights are to retain my weapon.

Someone on here said something like "the safest place for my weapon is in my holster not handled by anyone".

Anyways folks thanks in advance for all your input.

It all really depends on how much rights-exercising you want to do. For example, a citizen might know about all of his rights in the finest degree but not want to exercise them at all, preferring to make nice with the officer. Ala Mencken, I think that just encourages the bastards. But, its an option. So, it really depends on how far you want to take your rights.

Citizen · Feb 7, 2013

Munkey Butt said:
Now somewhere during the stop, LEO asks if there are any weapons or firearms in the car.

What would your response be?

The most important thing to understand is that there are at least two things occurring. First, there is the information conveyed in the questions and answers. But, senior in hierarchy is the mechanics of two-way conversation. By replying to his question at all you are conceding the intiative to him even if only slightly. It merely sets it up for him to keep the initiative by asking his next question right after your reply. Its human nature and social behavior to politely answer the next qeustion. Many people have become conditioned to it by everyday social conversation. If you are going to reply at all, you want to keep in mind that you still have full control over your own side of the equation. If you reply to a question, and he then asks another question, you can still reply with silence. Or, ask your own question to seize the initiative (but cops know about this so don't expect him to answer it.)

On to some possible responses to a question about weapons in the car.

"No offense, officer; I know you're just doing your job. But, I don't care to answer any questions."

If he pushes the matter, for example, "Well, if you don't have anything to hide, why don't you want to talk to me?" You can give some variation of:

"Officer, the Fifth Amendment was paid for in blood across nearly five centuries. It cost way to much to waive it." Or,

Officer, literally a million Americans have died defending our rights. I'm not going to spit on their graves by waiving them."

davidmcbeth · Feb 7, 2013

acmariner99 said:
I am very happy to say that I have never been pulled over while armed. If I was I would simply keep my mouth shut. If he asks if there are weapons I won't lie and if he asks to take possession of it/them, I will say I do not consent to any search or seizure. I may be tempted to ask "my weapon is 'here' and is properly holstered and/or secured, don't you think it is safer for all parties where it is?" - I have no idea how well that would go over though.

You don't have to lie .. just say "I'll answer any ? you have in court" ,, that's what they'll tell you if you ask him any ? roadside.

A perfectly acceptable response.

Citizen · Feb 7, 2013

Munkey Butt said:
SNIP If said LEO is pushes the issue and asks for you to unholster your firearm and hand it over.

What is your response/ action?

This is very dangerous. You can get shot doing this. Ask Philip Van Cleave, the president of VCDL, about the lawfully armed motorist who, at the cop's direction, reached into his glove box to temporarily surrender his handgun. Unnoticed by the motorist was the cop's partner standing just behind the front passenger window. The partner didn't hear the discussion between the driver-side cop and the motorist. All the partner saw was the passenger getting a gun from the glove box. The motorist died from the partner's gunfire.

And, that doesn't address the possibility you've been stopped by Billy Bada** Cop who's looking for an excuse to shoot someone. After the smoke clears, there will be the dead citizen; and beside him will be the unholstered gun "he tried to use to shoot the cop."

A much smarter response would be something along the lines of, "I won't resist you seizing the gun officer, but I think its a really bad idea for me to touch my gun in front of an armed police officer. I can get out and let you remove it if you'd like."

Citizen · Feb 7, 2013

Munkey Butt said:
Id just like to know what I am legally obligated to do. On the other hand I would like to what my rights are to retain my weapon.

I don't know about Washington state law; but I do know two federal cases that apply:

Pennsylvania vs Mimms says in so many words that a cop may temporarily seize for officer safety a gun. No reasonable suspicion about the dangerousness of the driver or passengers is required. Gun = danger.

Michigan vs Long says in so many words that a cop may search the passenger compartment of the vehicle for a weapon. The classic description is anywhere within reach of the driver, but don't focus on how long the driver's arms are. Read the case for the details.

Your main protection is the 4th Amendment: the cop cannot just arbitrarily search the car for a gun for officer safety without reasonable suspicion there might be a gun present. But, as soon as he has a reasonable suspicion there is a gun, PA v Mimms and Michigan v Long kick in. So, you're protected by the 4A combined with the cop's ignorance of the presence of the gun. But, as soon as he has some fact or observation upon which to hang a reasonable suspicion, those protections evaporate.

Your legal obligation is to not resist a police officer's lawful actions--in this case temporarily seizing or searching for a gun based on reasonable suspicion.

hermannr · Feb 7, 2013

skeith5 said:
I'll try and look up the cite when I get to a computer. My understanding is that the state supreme court has ruled that an officer removing your firearm for officer safely does not violate the 4th. I haven't been pulled over in years, long before carrying on a normal basis. That's a good way to avoid the issue.

I believe you do not have it all here. You may be searched, and any weapons siezed, IF you are being detained for a CRIME, or suspecian of a CRIME.

A traffic stop is not a crime under normal circumstances. It is a civil violation and NO they cannot disarm you under those conditions, just as they cannot detain you and sieze your weapon for walking down the street with an openly carried weapon.

Anyway, in WA, the cops need to worry more about Aeticle 1 Section 7 than the 4th. They cannot even do roadblack =, check everyone DWI stops under the WA constitution.

hermannr · Feb 7, 2013

Citizen said:
I don't know about Washington state law; but I do know two federal cases that apply:

Pennsylvania vs Mimms says in so many words that a cop may temporarily seize for officer safety a gun. No reasonable suspicion about the dangerousness of the driver or passengers is required. Gun = danger.

Michigan vs Long says in so many words that a cop may search the passenger compartment of the vehicle for a weapon. The classic description is anywhere within reach of the driver, but don't focus on how long the driver's arms are. Read the case for the details.

Your main protection is the 4th Amendment: the cop cannot just arbitrarily search the car for a gun for officer safety without reasonable suspicion there might be a gun present. But, as soon as he has a reasonable suspicion there is a gun, PA v Mimms and Michigan v Long kick in. So, you're protected by the 4A combined with the cop's ignorance of the presence of the gun. But, as soon as he has some fact or observation upon which to hang a reasonable suspicion, those protections evaporate.

Your legal obligation is to not resist a police officer's lawful actions--in this case temporarily seizing or searching for a gun based on reasonable suspicion.

WA Article 1 Section 7 is stronger than teh US 4Th. What a PA supreme court may say does not fly here. And even though the US supreme court has said roadblock DWI stops (where they stop everyone) are legal, WA State does not allow any random stop without suspician,,,and that include roadblock stops.

Traffic Stop Scenario

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Founder's Club Member

Banned

Founder's Club Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Regular Member