Guns got me out of a speedin ticket!

[splithoof]

I have said this before, and I will say it again: MINIMIZE YOUR CONTACT WITH L.E. SLOW DOWN, SHOW DRIVER COURTESY, LET THEM FOCUS ON ANOTHER DRIVER! Many otherwise "good" citizens have been put through the ringer of grief when it comes to vehicle stops mixed with firearms. Believe me, it's no fun.

 

[parsimonious_instead]

I passed a radar cop doing about 43 or so in a 35 the other day and cringed. It was stupid, not only that I was speeding, but that it was in an area that I know there's a cop usually sitting. I was so lucky that day that there just happened to be somebody passing me at the time. Normally I don't speed more than 5 over or so at any speed and generally keep it under limit in residentials. Every once in a while though, a sleeping cop reminds me to check my speed and that's a good thing. Haven't been pulled over in years and hopefully that continues.

You just illustrated an important distinction: willfully breaking the speed limit, vs. a bit of inattention paid to current velocity, or perhaps a bit of acceleration to get around a road hazard. The former warrants a pull-over, a ticket and a fine. The latter, IMHO, generally does not.

I think it's pretty low road to actually plan ahead and think "how can I present myself and/or my car to get away with willful speeding" vs. "what is it about me or the way I handle a police interaction that can help minimize the consequences of a generally unintentional infraction."

I'm on the Saw Mill River parkway all the time. A road that is rated at about 50mph. I do think that the limit should be revised upward, but until then, there's no need for the maniacal speeding and weaving that I witness almost every day.

The drivers I see doing this might be amazingly skilled people, but skill doesn't mean "perfectly lucky" either, and on a road like the Saw Mill an out of control car doing 80 mph will take out a lot of OTHER people who didn't make that choice to break the speed limit.

 

[avs11054]

Now I got into a conversation with another gun nut in my class a few months ago, he said something that made me curious, something that I'd be more skeptical about if he weren't a former Marine and a man I believe. He said he always carries at least his AR and a few handguns in his truck at all times because he loved to speed and said when he gets pulled over by Phoenix PD for speeding and they find out the amount of guns he's carrying they let him off because of the "paperwork involved" as he put it. He said every time a cop stops someone for any reason and they find guns in the car they have to fill out a couple pages for every handgun and up to five pages for every "assault" rifle. Haven't given it much thought till now because it did seem kind of outlandish. Am I the only one that's been told such a thing?

I can assure you...He has no idea what he is talking about.

 

[CathyGo]

I've seen some pretty severe cases of paperwork stretch but I don't think you could get 5 pages of stuff to fill out on a legally owned rifle. I'd love to see the paperwork if they do.

I'm seeing the serial number thing mentioned again. There are some guys on here who are pretty familiar with firearm laws and their enforcement. Does anybody know whether running the serial number has ever been defined as a search. Is there any case law saying that people HAVE to comply with it? If somebody detained me for an hour to verify that my gun isn't stolen with no reason to believe it's stolen I'd be pretty pissed. If there's case law clarifying it I'd like to add it to the pad of statutes that will be going in my gun case and glove box for traveling. Going through some very un-gunfriendly states.

 

[wideym]

I once was pulled over for doing 98mph on a 65mph highway by an Arkansas state trooper. I was headed home on a 4 day pass and the back of my Celica was loaded down with guns and ammo (but covered) as I was planning to do some serious target shooting over the weekend.

When the trooper asked if I had any drugs, guns, grenades, ect... in the car I started rattling off weapon types-AR-15s, FAL, UZI, M-1 Carbine..., he asked if I was a collector or on my way to the post office. I showed him my military ID, pass sheet and explained that I was on my way home on a 4-day pass and he gave me a written warning and let me go telling me to slow down so I make it home okay.

 

[avs11054]

I've seen some pretty severe cases of paperwork stretch but I don't think you could get 5 pages of stuff to fill out on a legally owned rifle. I'd love to see the paperwork if they do.

I'm seeing the serial number thing mentioned again. There are some guys on here who are pretty familiar with firearm laws and their enforcement. Does anybody know whether running the serial number has ever been defined as a search. Is there any case law saying that people HAVE to comply with it? If somebody detained me for an hour to verify that my gun isn't stolen with no reason to believe it's stolen I'd be pretty pissed. If there's case law clarifying it I'd like to add it to the pad of statutes that will be going in my gun case and glove box for traveling. Going through some very un-gunfriendly states.

In Chief Justice Warren's opinion for the majority in Terry Vs. Ohio, he writes

...Thus, it is argued, the police should be allowed to "stop" a person and detain him briefly for questioning upon suspicion that he may be connected with criminal activity. Upon suspicion that the person may be armed, the police should have the power to "frisk" him for weapons...

If a LEO discovers (whether from your admissions or his observations) that you are armed, yes, he can take the weapon. Checking the gun to see if it were stolen would be no different than checking your name to see if you have warrants. I do not believe there is any case law specifically dealing with this though.

I don't see why you would be detained for an hour to see if your gun is stolen or not. This can be done in a matter of minutes. If you were detained for an hour, that would probably be seen as unreasonable under the fourth amendment.

Just FYI, there are some state supreme courts that HAVE specifically ruled that officers can seize guns during a traffic stop. New Mexico was the most recent. These rulings only apply to the certain states thought.

 

[P-32]

Some of you guys really need to lighten up...I even give Troopers a break.

 

[Twiki357]

Now I got into a conversation with another gun nut in my class a few months ago, he said something that made me curious, something that I'd be more skeptical about if he weren't a former Marine and a man I believe. He said he always carries at least his AR and a few handguns in his truck at all times because he loved to speed and said when he gets pulled over by Phoenix PD for speeding and they find out the amount of guns he's carrying they let him off because of the "paperwork involved" as he put it. He said every time a cop stops someone for any reason and they find guns in the car they have to fill out a couple pages for every handgun and up to five pages for every "assault" rifle. Haven't given it much thought till now because it did seem kind of outlandish. Am I the only one that's been told such a thing?

AZ (Post 23) I have to assume that it was a while ago since that would constitute creating a record of guns and gun owners. Current AZ State law specifically prohibits ANY public entity from creating or maintaining any such records.

 

[bcp280z]

Technically on my last stop, 2 mo's ago I was somewhat "detained" for an hour. The Officer was riding solo, asked If I had guns in the truck, "Yes sir" cuffed me, told me to sit on the curb, (do you know how hard it is to sit on an 8 inch curb with no hands. Saw my radar detector. Checked if guns were clean, (no registration in FL) uncuffed, talked about local gun shops and advised me to get a safe rather than in console and under seat. Talked about keeping guns with the "good" people talked about fallen comrades, shook hand "have a nice day and slow down"

Truth is it's rather humiliating being cuffed and a waste of time, Unless I'm in a rush to work, I typically don't do more than 6 over. Especially If I'm on my way to the woods/range, I don't know how I could explain 7 guns.

 

[fallout mike]

I've been let off with warnings for lots of reasons. Guns, when asked if I had one in the vehicle. They have checked out my guns a couple times and discussed shooting for a bit and then told me to slow down. One officer saw my sound system through the hatchback when I was in high school and wanted to hear what it would do. After a bit he told me to slow down. A,couple of times they wanted to know what my car would run through the quarter and what I have done that makes it so fast. And then they say slow down. But, I would like to think that its because of my suave charisma and uncanny wittyness.

 

[FROGO207]

Seems like I am always on the way to somewhere to do some shootin. So I almost always have a few firearms in the vehicle. I rarely speed as the last warning I got was over 30 years ago. I am glad I live in the northern part of Maine where there are more armed drivers than not it seems. I am a Fire Fighter and we are frequently warned about a firearm in a vehicle when at an accident scene or burning vehicle in my experience. I have had zero problems at compliance checks either. Just sayin.

 

[Ala Dan]

We were told that our department did not chase after revenue; meaning writing
citations was soley up to the discretion of our police officers. Lots of times that
plays out according to the perps attitude; except in the case of traffic stops that
involve women. In that case, a female is going too receive "some paper"; from
a written warning, to a real honest-to-goodness citation. We were not profiling
or discriminating against women; just another C.Y.O.A. situatuion~!

 

[CathyGo]

Just FYI, there are some state supreme courts that HAVE specifically ruled that officers can seize guns during a traffic stop. New Mexico was the most recent. These rulings only apply to the certain states thought.

That's the distinction I was asking about. Sure you can temporarily take control of a deadly weapon the other person has but do you have the right to delay them just to run the serial number? Especially when you have no reason to suspect it's stolen?

I'm asking more just as an FYI than anything else. Working on a federal installation makes firearm enforcement a pretty simple matter. There are very few people allowed to have guns on post and I know most of them. I'd ask the question on a LEO forum but the responses I get there aren't normally as well researched as the ones on here.

The system used to check for stolen firearms sometimes runs really slow during peak use hours or just because it feels like it.

I'm familiar with Terry stop law. It only covers the ability to search the person for weapons. Anything beyond a patdown for weapons is not covered by Terry.

 

[avs11054]

That's the distinction I was asking about. Sure you can temporarily take control of a deadly weapon the other person has but do you have the right to delay them just to run the serial number? Especially when you have no reason to suspect it's stolen?

Yes a LEO can run the serial number. It goes along with running a name for warrants or routine license plate checks of cars. There is nothing that would raise suspicion that the person has warrants, or there is anything wrong with the plate, but it's allowed. I'm not sure it there's case law for running people, but I do know there is case law reference routine license plate checks.

The system used to check for stolen firearms sometimes runs really slow during peak use hours or just because it feels like it.

I'm not sure which systems you're refering to. Of the system's that I've encountered, "running slow" means a matter of seconds.

I'm familiar with Terry stop law. It only covers the ability to search the person for weapons. Anything beyond a patdown for weapons is not covered by Terry.

Terry vs. Ohio allows LEOs to conduct a "frisk" of a person if the LEO has reason to believe the person is armed. Now this does not mean that a LEO can pat down every person he pulls over, but if the person were to admit to having a firearm, that would obviously give the LEO reason to believe that person is armed.

Keep in mind too, that some states have laws requiring you to tell a LEO if you are carrying while in a car. In AZ, there is no requirement for you to volunteer the info, but if you are asked, you have to answer honestly, or you can be arrested.

 

[kingcheese]

i got tagged going 75 in a 55, and got a warning, no range bag needed


and on the point of telling a LEO about any firearms on you, it was explained to me like this, a police officer carries a gun for their protection, they will use it if they feel threatened, you not telling them in a carefull manner that you are armed makes them feel threatened, if you legally are carrying, then you have nothing to worry about, just let them know you have a weapon, let them now where it is located, and if it is loaded or not, from there, they can decide if it is a threat to them or not, and if the gun is see able from a police officers perspective, it is less of a threat

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Back in Arizona, I was stopped by a Glendale PD officer. I did not volunteer that I had a weapons permit, but he saw it when I held up my wallet to remove my driver's license. He asked if I was carrying, and I said I was, in the center console. (You are required to answer truthfully if asked. I invoked the Fifth Amendment on everything else.) He said no more about it, and eventually let me go with a warning. Now, I can't say that I was let go because of my gun, but it didn't hurt, either.

 

[Hocka Louis]

The officer really let u off with a warning and some friendliness, community building, to boot.

And I'll bet you've been more respectful of the speed limits since too haven't you!?

 

[TX1911fan]

I got 8 warnings in a row during the 4 years just after I got my CHL. Then I got a ticket. It was a good run while it lasted.

 

[Mule]

In my state, we are not required to disclose the presence of weapons to a LEO, unless asked. I voluntarily disclose that I am a ccw holder and that weapons are in the vehicle or on my person. I have never had the weapons confiscated or inspected. They ask "where is it". Followed by "leave it there". I have been dismissed with a verbal warning and a thank you for disclosing the weapons three out of four times I have been stopped. I will continue this procedure. It works for me.