Speeding Ticket and CCW

[Osageid]

Not sure if right forum but I thought I would share a story and get an opinion for my neighbor. My neighbor is an RN who was recently pulled over for speeding. She was approached by the officer (Sheriff deputy). Asked neighbor if she knew why he pulled her over.
She replied yes- for speeding
She then informed officer that she had a CCW with a pistol in car
Officer then asked who her passenger was (her 18 yo daughter)
Then asked where gun was and was it loaded?
Her reply was in glove box and magazine was not in gun.
He instructed her to stay and he proceeded to passenger side , reached in and removed the pistol and magazine from glove box and returned to his patrol car.
He returned with gun and speeding ticket and sent her on her way.

My thought is, I feel there was no reason for him to take possession of her firearm at all. She has paid the ticket but I still feel that she should complain to the sheriff. I live in Missouri where there is no need for weapon in a car regardless of CCW status.

Thoughts?????


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[N003k]

If she complains to the sheriff one of the following will happen:

The sheriff will be irked his deputy did that, and rebuke the deputy.

The sheriff just wont care and nothing happens.

The sheriff will be on the deputies side (It was for his safety ma'am, department policy)

The sheriff will never find out because you'll never get past his secretary.



Sure, there's a small chance the deputy will get rebuked, but, unless there's something more substantial than him just taking it to run the numbers (Which, SHOULD be an issue, I agree, but is very unlikely to be one to the sheriff) then, I wouldn't waste my time or breath.

 

[all357mag]

NO reason to tell officer she has CCW or is armed, unless it's the law in his/her state!

 

[Osageid]

Thanks guys, she was upset and the guys attitude was rather abrupt and she felt he was unnecessary in his actions.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[zorro45]

Maybe she did not want the deputy to (freak out, get alerted, overreact) if he saw the weapon when she reached into the glovebox to get out her registration and insurance card.
Good reason to keep gun and other papers in separate places. Also, she may only have seen one deputy, there could be another one on the right side blind spot and if so, he or she (note how politically correct I am) seeing that gun could be a problem.

 

[JohnKSa]

By law, I have to notify in TX (WHEN there is a gun on me or in the car) although there is no longer any penalty for failing to do so.

I notify in any case even though there's no penalty, and even when I'm not carrying because when they run my DL the CHL will come up and I find it irritates them if they have to find out for themselves.

I have never had an officer take possession of a firearm for the duration of the stop, however TX law specifically gives them the right to do so if they choose to.

That said, I do try to take the possibility into account so that if I am disarmed, it can be done as simply as possible and with minimum risk. For example, my carry holster can be unsnapped from my belt so the gun doesn't have to be unholstered. I would rather have them take a cased or holstered gun because it keeps the potential for accidents a little lower.

ASSUMING that the officer has the right to disarm in MO, then complaining would have no effect.

By the way, the glove box is not a good place to keep a handgun. If the car is broken into that's the first place that will get checked for goodies, and during a traffic stop, it's likely that the driver will need to access the glove box for insurance/registration materials.

 

[Fryerpower]

Well....In this particular case it was probably a good idea she informed him. Had he asked for her registration and proof of insurance it could have gone bad if she had not informed him ahead of time that there was a gun in the glove box.

Don't keep your gun in your glove box! (Or at least don't keep it where your registration & proof of insurance is at.)

Edit: Looks like JohnKSa beat me to it!

Jim

 

[Rob0321]

My guess he was bouncing the serial number off of something. Several years back I was stationed at Pendleton and had an apartment with my wife in San Clemente. We had a break in, I was asleep she was up watching TV. When the fellow came through the front door she had my 1911 at her side and pointed it, the guy ran out. The OC Sheriff's department deputy that showed up took the serial number then asked if I had any other firearms in the house. I told him I did, he asked if he could see them and log the serial numbers, to which I responded "no". He left it at that. I'd guess it is some sort of department policy to log and run every serial number they come across, "just in case".

 

[bikemutt]

Sure glad we didn't get pulled over today, family range day. I can just imagine it now... Any firearms Mr. Mutt? Um, do you need an exact count?

 

[Osageid]

I am not sure where she keeps proof of ins and registration but I don't think he spooked. Thanks for the replies and I will pass on info

 

[stressed]

I'm pretty sure they run the SN to find out if it's stolen. It's what they do here.

 

[JoePfeiffer]

When I get stopped, my license, registration, and proof of insurance are in my hand long before he reaches my door.

sent using CPIP (see RFC 1149)

 

[JTHunter]

Joe - it isn't a particularly good idea to be seen moving around by the LEO before he gets to your window. He might just come up with HIS piece already out and pointed at YOU. He might think you were reaching for and "crotching" a gun before he approaches you.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Thoughts?????


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

The deputies actions were completely within his authority as provided by Terry v. Ohio and several Supreme Court decisions following specifically applied to traffic stops. No valid reason to make a formal complaint.

If you don't want an interaction like that with a police officer, than don't keep the gun stored where it will become involved in the traffic stop and don't tell the officer about it, unless required to by law.

You may not feel like the officer had any reason to temporarily seize the firearm for officer safety, but your neighbor provided him the authority to do so as soon as she informed him the gun was there. If she didn't inform him (if not required by law), and the gun was stored separately from the registration and insurance papers, he would have no authority to search the vehicle or seize property until such time that he obtained reasonable suspicion to believe the subject stopped was armed and presented a danger to himself or others.

 

[JohnKSa]

Joe - it isn't a particularly good idea to be seen moving around by the LEO before he gets to your window.

Correct. You know you're just getting ready for him to get to the window.

He can see you're getting ready for him to get to the window too--he just doesn't know WHAT you're getting ready for him and they show him videos and tell him stories that give him a wild imagination.

If it's dark, turn on the interior lights and sit there still and quietly waiting for him to approach. It will make things less tense for the LEO and that's ultimately a good thing for you too...

 

[Atom Smasher]

Doesn't your CHL come up when they run your DL? Or is that just a piece of misinformation I've picked up over the years? I just assumed that it's better to notify as opposed to them finding out via your DL and then coming back to the car thinking "do they have a weapon with them?" or "do I need to be worried about this?"

As for the possession thing, it was a little weird, but calling up the sheriff is probably an exercise in futility.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Doesn't your CHL come up when they run your DL? Or is that just a piece of misinformation I've picked up over the years? I just assumed that it's better to notify as opposed to them finding out via your DL and then coming back to the car thinking "do they have a weapon with them?" or "do I need to be worried about this?"

If the officer discovers the person has a CHL from dispatch when running the driver's license, their concern about the presence of a firearm should go to near zero. Why would they be MORE concerned about a firearm than they were before when they find out from a state authority that the owner possesses a valid and current license to carry the firearm for which a background check was required to obtain and that any firearm possessed is 99% chance to be completely legal?

One must also remember that simply handing the officer a piece of paper in no way means that piece of paper is valid and current until the officer checks with the proper authority in the state anyway. Do they just assume that your driver's license is valid just because you hand them something that looks like a driver's license and claim it to be valid? NO! So why would they do the same with a CHL?

That's why, in my personal opinion, it's best to just keep your mouth shut about firearms and permits when allowed to by law. If they aren't concerned enough to ask, then why should I raise that concern for them? If they find out I have a CHL (it's CPL in my state) when they run my driver's license, then their concern should go to zero at that time about firearms. And if they were that concerned about it to begin with, then why not just ask if there are weapons in the car to begin with?

 

[coloradokevin]

Some officers are just afraid of guns, it would seem (I've known a couple like that). Personally, I appreciate it when people tell me that they are armed on traffic stops, just so there isn't any kind of misunderstanding if the gun is spotted by me in a "concerning" position during the stop. Notifying law enforcement of a gun isn't required in my state, but I've still always done it in the rare instances when I've been stopped off-duty, and my family members who carry have been advised to do the same.

My usual response to someone saying that they have a gun on them is to say something to the effect of: "okay, thanks for letting me know... just don't play with yours and I won't play with mine... hang on for just a minute and I'll be right back with you".

In most states the law allows for a police officer to temporarily disarm someone during a stop, as it sounds like this trooper did. Personally, I've never felt the need to do so when dealing with any person who has actually informed me that they had a gun. But, as you may have figured out by now, I'm not exactly an anti-gun guy.

Not all stops with guns go well, especially since I work in an area with a lot of crime/gangs. I had one recent stop where I pulled a car over that was occupied by an individual who was dressed in local gang colors (and the car had a records hit for a contact regarding gang activity). This guy's driver's side window was illegally mirror tinted so that you couldn't see inside, and the guy was acting feisty from the moment I walked up. As I approached him he put his window up most of the way at the last second, and initially refused my request to lower the window again (I was already concerned that he was trying to either gain control of a weapon or hide contraband). Anyway, as the window came back down I saw that the driver's hand was resting on top of a handgun that was pressed in between the seats. I ordered him to "show me your hands", and he started to turn into the car more, where I couldn't see if he was drawing the gun or not. At this point the guy found himself looking down the barrel of my gun, and he started saying "Hey man, it isn't loaded or anything". After explaining to him that my gun was in fact loaded, he finally complied with my orders. Turned out that he was only carrying a very realistic-looking pellet gun (certainly realistic enough to have got him shot if he had grabbed it), and had actually just used it to menace a rival gang member.

The point in all of this? Criminals aren't straight up and honest about the fact that they carry guns, and guns that are spotted in a condition like this can definitely get your blood pressure up when you're the officer standing at the driver's window. This guy gave me every reason to think that he was going to go for this "gun", and took the incident to a level it didn't need to go to ('cause he obviously wasn't planning to fight me with a pellet gun). Now, admittedly, this guy gave me a bunch of other clues that he was a bad dude, so the presence of a "gun" alone wasn't the only reason he got to take a look down mine. But, I still think there's usually some value in letting an officer know that you're carrying, just to avoid any tense misunderstandings.

In fairness, I've had cases where the good guys were carrying and didn't tell me, and I'll usually just let them know: "I see you have a gun there, please don't handle it during the stop. Okay?" I even had an absent minded lady reach into her glove box one day (forgetting her gun was there), and watched her nearly wet herself when the thing flopped out into her hand during the traffic stop. She was perhaps more surprised than I was, and quickly made it quite evident that she wasn't trying to grab a gun, so it wasn't anything that came off as threatening to me... but, again, I'm very comfortable with guns, and that could have been a tense situation for someone dealing with a less gun-accustomed officer. So, again, I think there is some value in voluntarily notifying an officer when there is a gun within your reach in a vehicle (I never notify about guns in the trunk, unless asked).

But, your milage may vary.

 

[Fryerpower]

I used to be all for just telling them required or not until I found out about not goofy laws in Tennessee. It seems the laws that establish state preemption only apply to laws passed from 1986 & on. There are some locations that this will get you into serious trouble and there is no central list of the laws. Good luck figuring them out.

Jim

 

[evan price]

If you're required by law to notify, then notify.

If you are not required by law to notify, if there is a likelihood the gun will be seen anyway, might as well notify. Otherwise, it's what you feel comfortable with.

On the side of the road, an LEO hates to find a gun by surprise.

 

[Davek1977]

We can all talk about how it "was a good thing" because "it may have been a problem" if they had "seen it when she opened the glovebox". Ok, lets talk about this. Yes, there is the SLIGHT possibility the sight of a gun will for whatever reason cause the officer to act differently. Barring that, in a state where one has no duty to inform, whats the worst that could happen? Barring a cop who for whatever reason flips his wig at the sight of an inanimate object, what "bad things" are going to happen? The cop might not like you? He might not be as friendly? You might get a ticket rather than warned? He may look for other reasons to harass you? What are these dire consequences that come with a lack of informing the officer? You may be forcefully disarmed? What bad things are going to happen if you are in full compliance with the law, but choose not to inform? Yeah, you might annoy or anger a cop. So what? How many times do people annoy or anger YOU in the course of a given week? Emotions are irrelevant...if you are in compliance with the law, most of these "bad things" people imagine happening when they don't inform are imaginary. Most cops are rational enough not to rough someone up or shoot them the second a gun is spotted in their possession.

 

[NavyLCDR]

True confession time

I was speeding 40+ in a 25 in a place I had never been before looking for a park that a reunion my wife, daughter, her freind and I were going to attend. I was open carrying my Taurus SS PT-145 in a Fobus paddle holster. Got stopped. Pulled over in a safe location off the street, rolled down window all the way, had driver's license and military ID card in my hand resting on outside mirror (military ID card is required to validate my out of state driver's license in WA). Folder with insurance and registration already retrieved by my wife from the glove box sitting on my lap, CPL firmly in place in my wallet.

Exchange pleasantries with the officer, give him the required documents. No mention of a gun or permit. He returns to my window from checking my info and asks me to step out of the vehicle! Never happened to me before, so I'm still trying to process this when he turns and walks back to between his car and mine waiting for me.

Well, heck... it would be illegal for me to leave the loaded gun in the car, because I was the only one with a CPL. I sure didn't want to be seen racking the slide to unload the gun. My shirt was tucked in, couldn't very well just flip my shirt over the gun. Oh well.... exited the vehicle normally. Walked back to the officer with half the SS Taurus exposed above the holster like it normally is (retention in that holster is internal around the trigger guard). Kept my hands more in front of me than at my sides.

Officer tells me that he didn't want to lecture me in front of the family, but I needed to slow down because there are residential areas on and off on the road. Let me go with a warning. I walked back to my car, he walked back to his. No mention of my gun by either one of us.

 

[Atom Smasher]

You may be forcefully disarmed? What bad things are going to happen if you are in full compliance with the law, but choose not to inform? Yeah, you might annoy or anger a cop. So what? How many times do people annoy or anger YOU in the course of a given week? Emotions are irrelevant...if you are in compliance with the law, most of these "bad things" people imagine happening when they don't inform are imaginary. Most cops are rational enough not to rough someone up or shoot them the second a gun is spotted in their possession.

"Most cops" indeed. What happens if I get Trigger Joe and he's had a bit too much coffee, and happens to spot my weapon and shoots me in "self-defense"? Obviously an extreme, unlikely scenario, but still possible. I'd prefer the LEO is at complete ease, and getting surprised with a weapon is probably not going to maintain that ease.

 

[JohnKSa]

If the officer discovers the person has a CHL from dispatch when running the driver's license, their concern about the presence of a firearm should go to near zero. Why would they be MORE concerned about a firearm than they were before when they find out from a state authority that the owner possesses a valid and current license to carry the firearm for which a background check was required to obtain and that any firearm possessed is 99% chance to be completely legal?

Probably part of it is that if you don't, in TX (and some other states), you're breaking the law and LEOs, in my experience, don't care for that much.

I think there's also a sense that LEOs have that they're entitled to the information, even when it's not required that the citizen notify. I think they also tend to get an adrenaline bump if they find the gun themselves when they feel that the citizen could have mentioned it up front because some of them tend to think that if a person has nothing to hide they'll just volunteer to spill their life story.

If the LEO has to do the discovery work on his own, they sometimes act like it's tantamount to admitting some sort of guilt on the part of the citizen that he didn't volunteer the information.

The whole thing can often be avoided by simply making sure the gun is not discovered. That's one reason I typically advise people not to carry in the glove box. If it's legal not to notify and the citizen chooses to take that approach, having the gun concealed in a location not likely to be encountered during a normal traffic stop provides the option of completely keeping the gun out of the mix. Why add a complicating factor or limit your options if you don't have to?

 

[NavyLCDR]

The whole thing can often be avoided by simply making sure the gun is not discovered. That's one reason I typically advise people not to carry in the glove box.

Of course, if the law requires a person to notify, nobody is advising they don't. If the person chooses that the best place for their gun is in the glovebox (which I personally disagree), they can also store their insurance and registration in a different place like clipped to top of a sun visor.