Can A LEO take my weapon for "officer safety"

[Citizen]

i've been following and reading this discourse intently, and it's fascinating.
i feel that i've learned much! thanks for that.

You're welcome. Glad to help. There is tons more you can pick up at leisure here:


http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?55914-Get-Your-4th-and-5th-Amendment-Resources-Here!!

 

[Citizen]

I wasn't aware of the meaning of stop. I guess encounter covers it perfectly.

Hmmm, so based on the Mendenhall case, as soon as I refuse consent to the encounter any additional actions or speech by the officer makes it a detention possibly. Then, if I end up in court, they have to produce RAS for the detention.

But if I merely refuse to answer I am leaving them the ability to maintain a consensual encounter and continue to talk to me.

You are joking about this being chess. It probably doesn't help that even the sight of a cop when I OC makes me start sweating like someone wanted for murder.

I'm gonna start practicing saying. "I'm sorry officer but I do not consent to this encounter." I've had one police officer talk to me once the first time I OC'd. I almost threw up. Lol. Sad, I know.

You know, I've toyed and come close to setting up practice sessions for NoVA guys to practice cop-OCer encounters. You might benefit from something like that. The whole point is to do it and get practice and familiarity so you can do it easily during a police encounter. Ability plus confidence will help settle those butterflies.

I don't know why I never pushed through on the practice sessions. Maybe lack of a place. Can't recall. But, it couldn't have been all that big of an obstacle. I think Tess expressed an interest, too. A few others also, but I can't recall names.

Maybe we can get some folks together a little early at the next VCDL meeting, not as a VCDL approved practice or anything. Just independently Just show up early and practice. Or, maybe a private meeting can be held somewhere indoors.

 

[Herr Heckler Koch]

BTW: in over 40 years,I have never been asked for my carry by any LEO.

In 2017, five years, it will have been forty years since my last line-of-duty conversation with a cop, a speeding ticket that I did not deserve - THAT one anyway.

The bland tolerance for petty infractions here is evidence, to me, of the generation gap. They seem to be thought evidence of a successful helter-skelter urban life.

 

[Herr Heckler Koch]

You know, I've toyed and come close to setting up practice sessions for NoVA guys to practice cop-OCer encounters. You might benefit from something like that. The whole point is to do it and get practice and familiarity so you can do it easily during a police encounter. Ability plus confidence will help settle those butterflies.

Role play sessions will be good for both sides and should be an essential element to (spit) training.

 

[Mayhem]

I read someone say something about the true reason they want your gun is to run the serial number.

I bought mine from a gun dealer so it is registered to me and the ATF is sure to already know this. So why would I need to be concerned about a cop running my serial number? I know it is not stolen since it is mine. What's the thought process on this?

 

[Herr Heckler Koch]

BCPHGV statistics use "crime guns," defined as all gun trace incident requests. Your innocent gun becomes a Brady Crime Gun when the cop calls in the SN.

 

[Mayhem]

BCPHGV statistics use "crime guns," defined as all gun trace incident requests. Your innocent gun becomes a Brady Crime Gun when the cop calls in the SN.

I am confused by this. My gun is not being used in any crime since I abide by the laws.

How is "Brady" getting involved if all that happens is they run the serial number to verify it was not listed as a stolen item in the computer? A gun "trace" seems to involved someone researching the ownership history and not just to see if it was stolen.

As I said, it is registered to me so it makes no difference if "they" know I own it because the government already knows this.

 

[Herr Heckler Koch]

I'm not sure just what is your question. It starts with the authority of an FOIA, whether or not one is actually needed (I suspect not), and then they spin and re-label the statistics to suit their purpose. It has nothing to do with crime or truth, but only beating their big lie-drum.

 

[peter nap]

I read someone say something about the true reason they want your gun is to run the serial number.

I bought mine from a gun dealer so it is registered to me and the ATF is sure to already know this. So why would I need to be concerned about a cop running my serial number? I know it is not stolen since it is mine. What's the thought process on this?

It's not registered to anyone, this is Virginia.
The ATF doesn't know who bought it. They have to go to the manufacturer to find the distributor, then to the dealer who sold it who pulls his records to see who bought it.

 

[Mayhem]

It's not registered to anyone, this is Virginia.
The ATF doesn't know who bought it. They have to go to the manufacturer to find the distributor, then to the dealer who sold it who pulls his records to see who bought it.

I see. So why not just hit every gun dealer and get their records to have them all at once. Why collect them one at a time using cops? And then, what's the point when I can sell it next week to someone else.

Not sure how this is all that necessary. If Virginia wanted to have a gun registration list, why not just make us registerthem like New Jersey?

 

[peter nap]

I see. So why not just hit every gun dealer and get their records to have them all at once. Why collect them one at a time using cops? And then, what's the point when I can sell it next week to someone else.

Not sure how this is all that necessary. If Virginia wanted to have a gun registration list, why not just make us registerthem like New Jersey?

What's your question Mayhem?
Is it.. why not make Virginia like New Jersey....do you really want me to answer that?:uhoh:

There is no gun registration in Va. It is not legal or desirable.

 

[Citizen]

I read someone say something about the true reason they want your gun is to run the serial number.

I bought mine from a gun dealer so it is registered to me and the ATF is sure to already know this. So why would I need to be concerned about a cop running my serial number? I know it is not stolen since it is mine. What's the thought process on this?

Dangerous premise there.

First, its not your/our job to explain why a government encroachment is unnecessary or wrong. It is government's job to thoroughly explain the necessity for each and every tiny encroachment. Government only has the power it is delegated by the people. Not one tiny picogram more (trillionth of a gram.) Making citizens explain why an encroachment is wrong is tantamount to saying the government can make whatever encroachments it wants unless we can refute it well enough. Which is another way of saying the grant of power to government is open-ended and the govern-ers can take whatever they want unless we 1) notice and argue back, and 2) are successful in the counter argument.

Second, it is a suspicionless search, a fishing expedition. The whole reason for the 4th Amendment was the Founders antipathy against suspicionless searches. In the colonial era, the king's agents had something called Writs of Assistance. These were basically general warrants that let the government agents search any house, any business, any place they wanted for articles upon which the relevant tax had not been paid. Since the government agents couldn't possibly have genuine suspicion, much less probable cause for everywhere, the Writs were basically fishing licenses--suspicionless searches. The entire philosophical underpinning of the 4th Amendment is the entirely valid hatred of free men for suspicionless searches.

Also, it employees loopholes created in the Fourth Amendment by the courts. One loophole is something called the plain view doctrine. If something is in plain view, according to the courts, it is perfectly acceptable for the cop to view it and if illegal seize it as evidence. This is fine if a terrorist is carrying a case of marked blowup material down the street and the cop notices it. However, the cops don't stop there. Now, you have cops snooping all over the place, rationalizing that if they can just get away with a creative new twist that "legitimizes" their physical presence in a certain location, anything illegal they view is fair game in itself, and anything they view, say on one of these excursions into places they didn't used to be able to go, that can be stretched to probable cause gets them a warrant.

I myself have experienced one of these little twists. A traffic stop years ago for a burned out tail-light. The cop about stretched his neck out of joint to get a "plain view" inside some paper grocery bags in the trunk (I had opened the trunk; this was back when I didn't know any better about cops not being your friend.) There was nothing plain view about rising up on his toes and craning his head for a look into the grocery bags. Since I was returning from the grocery store, all he got was an eyeful of groceries. And, we all know how drug dealers always go out and buy lots of groceries, especially perishable stuff like lunch meat just before they meet the Columbians and pick up several kilos for distribution.

And, the serial number search during a traffic stop proceeds from a court-created loophole in the Fourth Amendment. Terry v Ohio is clear that a cop needs three prongs before he can seize a gun. One, he must have RAS. Two, he must reasonably suspect the person is armed. And, three, he must reasonably believe the detainee is dangerous. Lets focus on the last two prongs for a moment. Two prongs: 1) reasonable suspicion the person is armed. 2) reasonably believe the person is dangerous. Two separate prongs.

Some years further along, a later court, in Pennsylvania vs Mimms sneakily did away with the separate prongs, meaning they did not expressly say they were doing away with them, they just did it in the text of the opinion without calling attention to it (so much for stare decisis--faith to precedent). In Mimms, the court equates a gun with dangerousness of the person. Now it is one prong for traffic stops. Gun = dangerousness.

The armed citizen driver is no longer protected by the requirement that the cop have some objective reasonable criteria to believe the person is dangerous. Just the fact he has a gun--just a reasonable suspicion he might have a gun!--is enough to get the person ordered out of the car and his person and car searched for that gun and the gun seized temporarily. I wouldn't put it past the cops to rationalize searching every passenger until the gun was found or determined not present. So, Mimms created a loophole in the Terry Stop loophole that throws a gun into fair game for the cop. And, the plain view loophole lets him run the serial number.

Oh, wait. There's more. Running the serial number is sure to be de minimus, meaning of such minimal intrusion, according to the courts' view of minimal intrusion into your sacred rights, that there is no point in arguing about it.

The poor 4th Amendment is hardly recognizeable anymore. The courts have shredded it. Or, more precisely, cops looking for creative ways to subvert its protections have shredded it, and the courts have burned the shreds by validating the cops' tactics.

But thats all just the mechanisms. The impetus for serial number running arises from two things, I am sure. First, the villification of guns over the last forty odd years, counting from the GCA 1968. If lots of people had guns and carried them, nobody would much care about the possession of the few stolen ones. Cops don't check the serial number on your watch during a traffic stop, do they? Yet, plenty of watches get stolen. If lots of people carried guns and there was no villification of guns, checking serial numbers would become just an exercise after arresting a real felon looking to return the stolen gun to the owner and create an add-on charge for the felon, instead of a primary vehicle to suspicionlessly try to nail any and every citizen whose gun falls into cops' hands.

The second impetus is cops being law enforcement officers instead of peace officers. Now policing is an industry, complete with industry trade groups and certification groups and unions and trade journals--the whole nine yards. And, it includes cops wanting to look good for that next promotion board, and get some locker-room cred by finding an "illegal gun". And we all know how regularly cops find stolen guns on citizens who are good little sheep and notify the cop about the gun. Why you can't hardly find the real news in the paper for all the reports of stolen guns being found on everyday citizens.

But, the main point here is that neither of those impetuses (-ii?) is anywhere near valid or tolerable, more so when it involves an enumerated right that took something like 623 years from Norman Conquest to the English Declaration of Rights to obtain. All for a suspicionless fishing expedition.

No! Goddam it! NO!!

 

[jnojr]

I read someone say something about the true reason they want your gun is to run the serial number.

I bought mine from a gun dealer so it is registered to me and the ATF is sure to already know this. So why would I need to be concerned about a cop running my serial number? I know it is not stolen since it is mine. What's the thought process on this?

What benefit do you derive from having a record of your presence, armed, with a very particular sidearm at a given time and location? Little if any. What harm could that record do to you? More than none.

It's like consenting to a search of your vehicle when you're positive you have nothing to hide. Is there any possibility of you benefiting? Is the cop going to pull out a winning Mega-Millions lottery ticket that's going to expire next week? Not likely. Might s/he find something that tells them they need to investigate further? Maybe. Probably not likely, but maybe.

I would consider consenting to such a search when the probability of some benefit to me outweighs the probability of harm.

 

[Mayhem]

What's your question Mayhem?
Is it.. why not make Virginia like New Jersey....do you really want me to answer that?:uhoh:

There is no gun registration in Va. It is not legal or desirable.

Oh Heavens no. I have no desire to have to register and get permission to sell to someone like Jersey. I was only pointing out that if Virginia wanted to start collecting your serial numbers they could just mandate registration, like Jersey.

I was trying to figure out how running me serial number was so detrimental and how the state was somehow keeping track ot it. I believe there is a state law that says they can only keep track of what you own for like 30 days and they have to delete it. This, I believe, is for the 1 gun a month law.

 

[Mayhem]

What benefit do you derive from having a record of your presence, armed, with a very particular sidearm at a given time and location? Little if any. What harm could that record do to you? More than none.

It's like consenting to a search of your vehicle when you're positive you have nothing to hide. Is there any possibility of you benefiting? Is the cop going to pull out a winning Mega-Millions lottery ticket that's going to expire next week? Not likely. Might s/he find something that tells them they need to investigate further? Maybe. Probably not likely, but maybe.

I would consider consenting to such a search when the probability of some benefit to me outweighs the probability of harm.

What does it matter if "they" know what I carry and where I was at any given time. When I OC they can track all that by looking at me. I do not fear a knock on the door asking for my gun because somebody was shot in the same city block I was in a few hours earlier. They are going to need a search warrant and some type of PC to pin it on me. Just because I was breathing air at that location does not count. ha-ha

I would never give consent to search my car and this is kind of side tracking IMO. We are talking about "why" the police want to run the SN of your gun. Presuming they have taken it from you for safety or something. A situation you are unable to refuse.

Run my SN!!! It is not stolen and if it comes back as stolen, I have a bill of sale from the gun dealer.

 

[Herr Heckler Koch]

If you were from Wisconsin or Chicagoland, instead of "everywhere," then you might be familiar with Badger Guns to know that gun shops never receive stolen guns, and aren't even suspected of such.

If your gun comes back stolen then your bill of sale just sailed out the outhouse window.

 

[Mayhem]

@ Citizen

Thanks for the info on the court cases. Good to know.

I guess with cops getting shot at the window during traffic stops does not help us any while we have no evil intent. So looking beyond why the cop has taken a gun from us during the stop "for his or her safety" I can only guess the logical thing to do would be to run the SN to be sure it is not stolen.

I guess I am thinking that if my gun were ever stolen, how in the hell would I ever get it back??

I can check Craigs list or Ebay or some other online site selling stuff for my stolen property. I can meet and check the SN myself but what if it is not sold for a few years or if ever? What if the thief decides to keep it and use it for his own protection.

If the cops did stop him and he had my property, I sure as hell would hope they would do their damn job and find my chit!!

So while I can understand the desire for privacy, I also see possible recovery. That is why I asked the reasons it was so bad to have it done.

 

[peter nap]

I was trying to figure out how running me serial number was so detrimental and how the state was somehow keeping track ot it. I believe there is a state law that says they can only keep track of what you own for like 30 days and they have to delete it. This, I believe, is for the 1 gun a month law.

That's only for the background check when you purchase it from a dealer. If your SN is run by a LEO, it's his an the Department's for as long as they want to keep it.

Sure the state could pass legislation. Nearly every member of the GA knows that's political suicide in Va...but it could happen.

I'd just ignore it and so would at least 50% of the gun owners that don't have traceable guns.

You'd flat be amazed at how many Thompsons are still floating around that the owner wouldn't register during the Amnesty period.

 

[Glockster]

On the other hand, if two cops block the sidewalk in front of me, a third takes up position behind me, and one in front demands, "I wanta see sum ID!", then I know I'm seized, and the refused consent to an encounter just becomes a formality--an important one--but it doesn't really establish the involuntariness because that was already determined. For myself, I've concluded that the first move for me is to take advantage of a point of law* and politely, expressly refuse consent to an encounter.

Really getting a lot out of this discussion! One question that I have about the above situation as it's been on my mind, especially with the still on the books stop & ID law here in VA BH -- so they stop you and demand ID. That's a seizure, if I'm understanding this correct. So they take your ID, look at it (or whatever, meaning record info, etc.) and then hand it back to you and then say that you are free to go. What would you do then? Meaning that they supposedly had to have had RAS, but now by suddenly identifying you they don't (not saying this is the actual motive for what/why they did it, of course).

 

[Citizen]

SNIP

I guess I am thinking that if my gun were ever stolen, how in the hell would I ever get it back??

I can check Craigs list or Ebay or some other online site selling stuff for my stolen property. I can meet and check the SN myself but what if it is not sold for a few years or if ever? What if the thief decides to keep it and use it for his own protection.

If the cops did stop him and he had my property, I sure as hell would hope they would do their damn job and find my chit!!

So while I can understand the desire for privacy, I also see possible recovery. That is why I asked the reasons it was so bad to have it done.

Counting from the Norman Conquest, it took 725 years--seven and a quarter centuries--to win the rights in our Bill of Rights. Along the way, countless people suffered for lack of rights. Beheading, torture, imprisonment, dispossession of property, impoverishing fines, exile. Seven centuries of blood and treasure wresting rights from government one piece at a time.

Since the 1791 adoption of the Bill of Rights, literally over one million Americans have died defending those rights.

The cost of wresting rights away from government was staggering. Based on that alone, their value is immeasurable. Include what it has cost to maintain them, and what one loses when they are gone again, and they become literally priceless.

Someone here a while back accused me that if something of mine was stolen, I'd quick change my tune. I thanked him not to insult me--I'm not so selfish that I would weaken or deny everyone else's rights just to obtain a little satisfaction for myself.

For all readers, please check my signature line. For years I had no signature. I added one a couple weeks ago.