Middle-aged lady disarmed during traffic stop--SOP???

[madcowburger]

Michigander,

I don't know anything about any "pretense," but the *pretext* (excuse) was that they'd received an anonymous phone tip about a man with a crowbar (my cane, apparently) "peering" into the display windows of some furniture stores, which were closed for Sunday.

In fact I had passed down a street with several furniture stores a block or two back, before I was stopped and warrant-checked. Whether they were open for business or closed, I had no idea and less interest at the time, as I was merely passing by, and was not shopping for any furniture.

Besides, if merchants do not wish passers-by to look at their wares, why do they display them in their windows? I suppose it's possible that I might have glanced at my reflection in a store window as I limped past, but I wasn't window shopping, much less "casing the joint" prior to trying to break in and steal a sofa.

That was basically it. I was detained about 40-45 minutes waiting on the warrant check, but was not searched or "proned out" or otherwise manhandled. I wasn't particularly nervous at first, since I didn't think I was doing anything wrong, but when the whole warrant check business got started, and when it took so long, I started to *get* nervous, thinking some mistake might be made. (I have been on the wrong end of some "mistaken identity" hassles before, and my real last name is almost always misspelled and mispronounced by everyone, unless I make a big deal of spelling it and sounding it out for them.)

Finally I was allowed to go on my way, but the experience had rattled me to the point that when I got home I hardly knew what I was doing, and inadvertantly locked my car keys *and* house keys inside my car. My next door neighbors left their football game on TV to spend almost two hours helping me "break in" my own car with a coat hanger. Strangely enough, no one with a cell phone growing out of his or her head turned that in as "suspicious."

MCB

 

[Zundfolge]

Yeah, if the person has a CCW there's a basic presumption that he/she is more law-abiding than the typical gang banger, but law-abiding folks have temper tantrums, too.

IIRC there was a study released in the state of Texas that concluded that CCW holders are more law abiding then the police (if anyone has a link please post it).

If they don't disarm fellow police officers during a traffic stop there's no reason they should be disarming CCW holders.

Its unsafe. Its counter productive to community relations. Its unnecessary.

 

[one45auto]

Yeah, if the person has a CCW there's a basic presumption that he/she is more law-abiding than the typical gang banger, but law-abiding folks have temper tantrums, too.

Are you sure you're on the right board? That sounds like something Sarah Brady would say! If you follow that logic then perhaps police officers should also be disarmed during traffic stops, because what's to prevent them from going bonkers and blowing away an innocent civilian? They're human too and have gone nuts from time to time, right? Or are you arguing that the presence of both the uniform and badge somehow magically transforms them into omnipotent demigods incapable of flaws?

Look, let's break this down. A police officer is simply a person who gets paid to carry a gun during his shift and is authorized to use it against his fellow man in the course of his or her duties if need be - nothing more. Regardless of what your own views may be, in the end that makes them no better, no more trustworthy, no more knowledgeable, and certainly no less human than the rest of us. To somehow elevate them above the general public simply because of their profession is a mistake.

It sounds to me as if that police officer distrusts anyone who isn't a cop, and I've heard it said before that after a few years on the job some officers come to believe that there are three kinds of people - cops, cops families, and everyone else. This individual clearly seems to be leaning in that direction, given the fact that the mere presence of a firearm in the hands of an ordinary citizen caused him to fear for his safety to the point where he felt he needed to disarm her. That's an irrational fear, bordering on paranoia, and as others here have said it is more worthy of the anti-gun crowd than an officer of the law. Quite frankly if it were me, I'd be filing a formal complaint with the local chief of police so fast that the officer would be called into the proverbial principal's office the moment he finished his shift.

 

[juggler]

Thanks Hawkmoon, I forgot about that link. The section for my state is a little out of date, but I had recently searched the latest publication and it seems to have not changed.
Unless they ask me to leave the vehicle I've decided not to mention it. Be polite and keep your hands in sight.....common courtesy.

 

[DBK]

All those who were present, raise their hand....hmm so what really did happen on this traffic stop?

My point is, we are only getting one (hostile at that) side.

 

[another okie]

The officer might have been within his rights, but as far as doing it for "officer safety-" that makes me laugh. One of the most dangerous moments in gun handling is taking it out of or putting it back in a holster, especially if you are unfamiliar with the gun. He was in far greater danger pulling a gun out of someone else's pocket than from a CCW holder.

I do sometimes carry my Glock without one in the chamber partly for this reason, though in Oklahoma we now have a law that says that a CCW holder with a gun is not ground to disarm them. The law is not everything you could ask for, but it's progress.

Oh, and don't say "I have a gun." A stressed out cop might freak out on that. Say "I have license to carry and I have it on me" or something like that. Avoid the word "gun."

 

[another okie]

The officer might have been within his rights, but as far as doing it for "officer safety-" that makes me laugh. One of the most dangerous moments in gun handling is taking it out of or putting it back in a holster, especially if you are unfamiliar with the gun. He was in far greater danger pulling a gun out of someone else's pocket than from a CCW holder.

I do sometimes carry my Glock without one in the chamber partly for this reason, though in Oklahoma we now have a law that says that a CCW holder with a gun is not grounds to disarm them. The law is not everything you could ask for, but it's progress.

Oh, and don't say "I have a gun." A stressed out cop might freak out on that. Say "I have license to carry and I have it on me" or something like that. Avoid the word "gun."

You could also avoid speeding. I'm amazed how many people post about being pulled over while carrying for speeding. Obey the law. The speed limit is the law. If you are carrying a gun you have a higher duty than ever to obey the law. Slow down! Speeding shows a lack of discipline and a real self-centered quality that is most unattractive in a gun toter.

 

[R.H. Lee]

My point is, we are only getting one (hostile at that) side.

If you thought the original post was hostile, apparently you're not acquainted with hostility.

 

[TamThompson]

OK, one at a time:

Ellery--glad you posted that you were just pulling my leg.

Chas_martel: thanks! It's been awhile since my CHL class. I had heard it suggested that you tell the officer you are legally armed, but on your advice I think I'll not say that again.

Zundfolge--if you google Texas Department of Public Safety, go to the CHL page, then click on demographics. Yes, we do have a much lower crime rate except for (oddly enough) stalking and child molestation.

AnotherOkie--have you ever driven in Austin? Drive the speed limit and you'll get run over. I know, I know--no excuse. I was speeding, I admit it, and I will pay the consequences. BUT--that's no excuse to treat me like a criminal.

DBK--go back and read my post. I'm a professional, full-time writer, and I like to think my writing is objective. I always strive to be fair. Heck, I admitted I was speeding!! As far as being hostile to the cops: yeah, right, that's why I go drink beer with them when the gun shop closes, and why I take gun classes taught by them, and why I'd back one of 'em up if they needed citizen help.

I realize there's three sides to every story: she said, he said, and what really happened. But I have tried to be objective, and if you read my post, I certainly didn't name-call or try to run down the officer.

As to my carry method: I believe in carrying a back-up gun, particularly since my primary is a semi-auto, and thus, could jam. (Glock 30.) My back-up used to be a Keltec .32, but I was uncomfortable with the slightly anemic caliber and with backing up a semi-auto with another semi-auto, so my new carry gun (that the cop took out of my pocket) is an S&W Airweight 637 revolver, .38+p. It was in a leather Galco pocket holster that covered the trigger guard. When the cop went to pull it out of my pocket, I said, "That gun is loaded," just so he would know.

Yes, I'm sure I was very scary in my bathing suit, shorts, and Hawaiian shirt and my Teva sandals, with my hair in a pony tail still wet from swimming in Barton Springs, and my hands up on top of the steering wheel. <sarcasm mode off>

 

[Drizzt]

Tam, let's face it. Police here in Austin aren't quite like you would find in other more 'civilized' portions of the state. Fortunately, I don't have to ever drive very far, unless I choose to. I have Red's just 2 blocks away, and work is less than 10 minutes drive.

 

[auschip]

with my hair in a pony tail still wet from swimming in Barton Springs

Hippy! Just kidding, I had a somewhat similar experience out near my house (Bee Caves Road). Sunday afternoon, my father in law & I were running up to get some BBQ and he was doing somewhere around 12 over. The Sheriff's Deputy caught him. Nice guy, but when he asked if we were armed (he gave him the CHL along with DL) FIL said yes, he asked where and it was in the center console. The SD didn't disarm him, but he asked us to put our hands on the dash and he put his hand on his firearm. He went back to the cruiser wrote the ticket and sent us on our way.

After we were driving away my FIL (a lawyer) asked me how many times I thought an officer had been assaulted by a fat, late 50's lawyer in a $60k vehicle in Westlake.

 

[Zundfolge]

Zundfolge--if you google Texas Department of Public Safety, go to the CHL page, then click on demographics. Yes, we do have a much lower crime rate except for (oddly enough) stalking and child molestation.

For those who are interested ... here's the page in question

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/chlsindex.htm

Although I don't find anything that compares crime rates of license holders with police officers

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

This is not Iraq. I'm not an Iraqi, and I'll bet Tam is not either, nor are most permit holders. The police don't need to be acting like an occupying army, and we don't need to be treated like occupied Iraqis.

MCB

Very well said. Increasingly, the police are adopting the attitude and methods, when dealing with Americans, of an occupying army in a conquered land. It is only natural that they should be like that, however, considering how our rights are being steadily eroded by the courts. The courts are telling them, more and more, that we are a lower class of citizen, and cops are a higher class of citizen.

If anyone has ever studied the history of Japan, you will find a parallel in the status of the Samurai versus anyone else, excluding, of course, members of the royal family (who seem to parallel public office holders in our nation in this regard). Unless you were a member of the royal family, or another samurai, you had to behave quite obsequiously towards the samurai (e.g., never looking them in the eye) when forced to deal with them, or they could beat you, or kill you, at their discretion. We are not that far from this, folks, and it's getting worse every year.

 

[spartacus2002]

I find myself in agreement with The Real Hawkeye.

My copy of the Constitution doesn't have an "Officer Safety" clause that overrides the Bill of RIghts, but SCOTUS' copy sure seems to have one....

 

[M2HMGHB]

This was also posted on glocktalk as this thread: http://www.glocktalk.com/showthread.php?threadid=264094


Quite frankly the amount of cop bashing on here gets iritating at times.
Have any of you known what it feels like to deal with this crud? Quite frankly the lady in question put everyone at risk by speeding, forcing the officer to pull her over, forcing him to exit the car on a street etc....

Yes police officers do get grouchy, but I have a question, do YOU also not get grouchy at times? Do you get yelled at harrangued harrassed etc when you're trying to do your job? Come on people think for a minuete, NYC garbage men make more money starting the NYC cops.

I thought this was supposed to be The High Road, not "let's call all cops names and all citizens with CCW permits dont commit crime" By speeding the person in question was showing how immature she was.

I do agree the officer acted improperly by thrusting the radar detector into the car, but I have no opinion on him reaching to disarm her. Over the year's I've learned that sometimes officers have good reasons for what they do concerning weapons.

 

[O.F.Fascist]

Quite frankly the lady in question put everyone at risk by speeding, forcing the officer to pull her over, forcing him to exit the car on a street etc....

No the lady did not put everyone at risk, the law put people at risk.

I was pulled over for going 83 on a 65. The act of getting pulled over and then getting back on the road was far more dangerous than my speeding.

Most speeding laws are stupid, they have nothing to do with safety and everything to do with making money.

 

[HankB]

the lady in question put everyone at risk by speeding, forcing the officer to pull her over, forcing him to exit the car on a street etc....

Firstly, the purpose of many of the speed limits around the Austin area can be summed up in two words: revenue enhancement. Without knowing the situation, we can't actually say what she did was unsafe.

Secondly, she didn't force the cop to do anything. If she had the power to force Officer Gropeatelli to do anything, I strongly suspect she would have forced him to leave her alone . . . or at least not to cop a feel (Hmmm . . . I wonder where that term actually came from. Seems singularly appropriate here.)

Thirdly . . . it seems we have a number of THR folks around the Austin area. Maybe we should have a group shoot sometime.

 

[M2HMGHB]

What I was saying is that if she hadnt been speeding she would never have been pulled over. I know of not one cop who bother's pulling someone over for 5mph over the limit, some if not most would pull people for 10 and all for anything more then 10. She took her chance by speeding and got caught. I agree the officer was wrong but if she hadnt been speeding it would not have happened.

 

[R.H. Lee]

Most speeding laws are stupid, they have nothing to do with safety and everything to do with making money.

Exactly.

And btw, M2HMGHB, Officer Gropeatelli needed a RADAR GUN to even determine she was speeding, so obviously she was not driving erratically.

 

[deej]

And if they were REALLY worried about "officer safety", they'd just use photo radar and MAIL her the ticket.

 

[JohnKSa]

It's not SOP to disarm a CHL, but the officer may at his discretion.

I sure hope that doesn't happen to me.

Sometimes I carry in a bellyband below the belt in front. Not only do I not want an officer to go exploring in my pants, I imagine it would be pretty hard to draw from that location if you're not ME. It's also virtually impossible to reholster without undressing about half way.

AND, I carry a PPK with the safety off. The DA trigger pull is plenty stiff to prevent an ND, but the idea of someone groping around blind in my pants for an off safe pistol doesn't make me smile...

From this and other stories, it sounds like sooner or later an officer is going to accidentally shoot a CHL while doing an unnecessary "discretional" disarm.

 

[JPM70535]

Having spent in excess of 20 years as a LEO both as a State Trooper and a Florida Deputy Sheriff, I encountered numerous traffic violators who were armed legally (and a few who were not). My response to the legally armed citizens was always to inquire as to where the weapon was being carried. I asked that the individual refrain from reaching for that area of his person, and continued the traffic stop. My feeling was that it was far safer to avoid handling the weapon as long as the motorist remained non threatening.

I would have perfectly justified in separating the motorist from his weapon during the traffic stop based on Officer safety, and there were times when I did temporarily disarm individuals who displayed hostility or agression.
In those instances it made no difference whether the motorist was Male or female, they got patted down and disarmed. However with these few exceptions I always reasoned that a legally armed citizen was not a threat to mysafety. I do not take issuue with any Officer who feels differently however, since his threat level redline may be cosiderably lowr tha mine.

 

[R.H. Lee]

So, if you happen to be armed, but don't have the 'permission slip' (CCW), there is no duty to tell the nice officer that you're carrying.

 

[O.F.Fascist]

So, if you happen to be armed, but don't have the 'permission slip' (CCW), there is no duty to tell the nice officer that you're carrying.

Well other than the fact that the concealed carry law says you have to inform the officer about your firearm there arent many laws that say you have to tell the police officer anything.

So if you dont have a concealed carry license then you dont have to answer the officer's question.

It would probably make the stop not go as smoothly as it should but unless there is a law that says you have to something, then you dont.

 

[Diggler]

JPM70535

Good to see a voice of reason from a veteran LEO. It's good to see that you treat people with respect and logic.

Thanks for your respectful service.