tecumseh, and tallpine,
The mere fact that kitchen knives, and a buck knife was in the vehicle doesn't give the LEO suspicion. It's the fact that they were lied about!! If the occupant lied about those two things, what else was he lying about. Well, hmm, he was lying about a handgun in the car. Well, wait a second, he was lying about a rifle in the car also!! Notice the officer did NOT ask, "Sir are there any weapons in here, either assembled or disassembled, or loaded or unloaded, or locked or unlocked." No, the LEO asked if there were any WEAPONS. To which the answer should have been, "yes, there is a knife on the visor, a revolver locked in a case and a non-working rifle under the bed. I'm sorry, but if I was the officer, and I was continually being lied to and then finding items that definately posed a danger to me, I would "frisk" (<-- which is different than search) the vehicle also. Then, based upon what is found/not found during the frisk can establish probable cause to do a detailed search.
Keep in mind that your 5th ammenment right to remain silent doesn't mean you have a right to lie or "mis-represent" yourself to the police. The occupant could have terminated his consent at anytime and told the officer to leave. And the bottom line, is that the job of the police is to find criminals. If you give them the opportunity they are going to look for evidence of criminal activity, or evidence that you pose a danger to them. Just as everyone on this forum regards strangers as a potential threat until proven otherwise, the LEO definately look at anyone as a potential threat until proven otherwise. And the fact that the occupant continually lied about the presence of a weapon definately gives the LEO reason to believe that the occupant poses a danger!!!!
The mere fact that kitchen knives, and a buck knife was in the vehicle doesn't give the LEO suspicion. It's the fact that they were lied about!! If the occupant lied about those two things, what else was he lying about. Well, hmm, he was lying about a handgun in the car. Well, wait a second, he was lying about a rifle in the car also!! Notice the officer did NOT ask, "Sir are there any weapons in here, either assembled or disassembled, or loaded or unloaded, or locked or unlocked." No, the LEO asked if there were any WEAPONS. To which the answer should have been, "yes, there is a knife on the visor, a revolver locked in a case and a non-working rifle under the bed. I'm sorry, but if I was the officer, and I was continually being lied to and then finding items that definately posed a danger to me, I would "frisk" (<-- which is different than search) the vehicle also. Then, based upon what is found/not found during the frisk can establish probable cause to do a detailed search.
Keep in mind that your 5th ammenment right to remain silent doesn't mean you have a right to lie or "mis-represent" yourself to the police. The occupant could have terminated his consent at anytime and told the officer to leave. And the bottom line, is that the job of the police is to find criminals. If you give them the opportunity they are going to look for evidence of criminal activity, or evidence that you pose a danger to them. Just as everyone on this forum regards strangers as a potential threat until proven otherwise, the LEO definately look at anyone as a potential threat until proven otherwise. And the fact that the occupant continually lied about the presence of a weapon definately gives the LEO reason to believe that the occupant poses a danger!!!!