Traffic stop turns into much more...questions.

Status
Not open for further replies.
By the way. A beer and a half.....isn't ever a beer and a half.

Oddly enough, the cops don't seem to be here giving their version of the events, so everyone seems to be offering advice based on one side of the story.
 
You are correct, they are not here. But they are trained to detect and arrest those that drive while intoxicated. I am not in jail, i am still here.

They were correct in doing a field DUI test. And they determined that i passed. That should be a good idea of their side of the story.
 
ServiceSoon - Yep! Im on those forums as well. How did u come accross that? Small world.


Stephen - I have one :( He said i just looked like i was going fast.
 
Florida's CWL is a Concealed Weapons License... Doesn't that extend to an ASP baton? My impression of Florida law was that you could carry anything and the permit doesn't restrict you to a pistol, as it does in Texas.

Am I under arrest? Am I free to go? I want to speak with my lawyer.

Over and over again.
 
In Ohio it doesn't take much at all to have probable. The police don't really care. They will detain you, bring in the dogs and search. I have read many articles in the paper where this has happened over a speeding violation. Trying to argue "probable cause" is getting very difficult. In my teenage years you could tell a LEO "no warrant no search", these days it doesn't work like that.
 
Get a good radar detector
Click to expand...
They only work if the radar is turned on, and by then it's too late.

I have one He said i just looked like i was going fast.
Click to expand...
Yeah we were trained to be able to visually id a speeder but with out something, radar or pacing, to back that up it would never stick... sounds like he was bored.


As a former State Trooper I never searched anyone's car without permission. Yes it can be done incident to arrest or if something illegal was in plain view. But by always getting consent I was covered. I even had our Sgt come out and watch one day for a guy that was ranting about how I was going to take his stuff... nothing I wanted anyway. By not asking you to search it first he is opening himself and the department up to lawsuit. I'd get a copy of the report and see what it says. Public records are wonderful. If 5 cop cars were on seen there has to be some kind of report. And if your trunk was locked and you had not given permission and you were not under arrest then he can not go into a locked compartment. At least in CO. Be assertive about your rights, ask for a supervisor to come down. Do not be rude or confrontational, not saying you were, as that will not end well for you.
 
The smell of alcolol is good enough to get you out and do field sobriety tests, and to check the veh for the sorce of intoxication. The ASP was in plain sight. The ASP is a baton which in most states is a felony to possesss w/o a lic. If you were not booked for it your were very lucky, you would have lost your ccw for sure. Count your blessings the you were not arrested. As for asking for permission , it wasnt needed. The case would have held up in court. As far as law suit, who cares as long as the arrest was legal. The big questions are why are you drinking/driving armed w/a gun and what is the asp for? Think before you put yourself in a bad situation. All in all you were lucky.
 
Last edited:
In Ohio it doesn't take much at all to have probable. The police don't really care. They will detain you, bring in the dogs and search. I have read many articles in the paper where this has happened over a speeding violation. Trying to argue "probable cause" is getting very difficult. In my teenage years you could tell a LEO "no warrant no search", these days it doesn't work like that.
Click to expand...

Which is why you never argue with a cop. As soon as they ask to search the vehicle (in this case as soon as they open the door) “Officer I do not consent to any searches I’d like to speak with my attorney before I say anything else” and SHUT UP

As soon as they ask you to step out of the car “officer I’m not comfortable making any statement with out my attorney present and SHUT UP

As soon as they Mirandize you ”Officer, I choose to exercise my right to remain silent, I’d like to speak to my attorney before answering any questions and (all together) SHUT UP

No one in this discussion (including me) knows enough about the law to deal with the cops in a situation like this that’s why you get somebody who does it for a living. When lawyers deal with cops on their own business, the hire other lawyers to do their talking for them.

Treo’s rules for dealing with cops

1. People have gone to jail for being in the wrong place, at the wrong time and fitting a general description.

2. If you talk to a police officer long enough you will say something that can be used against you.

If a police officer stops you he holds all the cards. He knows why he stopped you. He knows what he suspects you of. And he is under no obligation to share any of that information W/you.

This is a perfect time to calmly and firmly assert your rights

if I were stopped on the street and questioned by a police officer the very first words out of my mouth would be "Officer am I free to leave." This question establishes the status of the contact immediately, and tells you exactly how to proceed. If you are told you are free to go do so immediately, Thank you officer have a good day. Do not say another word.

If the officer tells you, you are not free to go you can rest assured that he suspects you of something and is looking for probable cause to make an arrest. This also establishes the contact as official, I would hand him my ID & CHP immediately (you’re not sitting in a car he's going to pat you down)

If you are being detained the less you say the better, if the officer has probable cause he's going to arrest you no matter what you say. If he doesn't the easiest way for him to get it is for you to open your mouth. If asked where my weapon is I would answer directly and refuse comment on all other questions. "Officer I do not wish to make a statement or answer questions without my lawyer present" He can't keep you there forever & if he had PC you'd already be in handcuffs. No matter what he asks you (exception questions directly related to where your firearm is) ask to speak to your lawyer before answering the question.
 
Vintage Slotcars

As for asking for permission , it wasnt needed. The case would have held up in court. As far as law suit, who cares as long as the arrest was legal
Click to expand...

Where did you get your law degree?

Are you admitted to the Florida Bar?
 
The ASP is a batton which in most states is a fellony to possesss w/o a lic.
Click to expand...

Really? Where is that law?

So many people come up with these odd laws that no one can ever find in print. They are not illegal in any of the states I have lived in (although they may be illegal to carry)

In Florida (my current state of residence, and the OP's state) they are legal to carry concealed with a CCW (790.06 and 790.01), and are also legal for open carry (790.053).
 
And you are correct about stepping out and shutting up. Its just hard to do at the time, as usually it seems worth it to talk it out and maybe reason a bit.
Click to expand...

"A right not exercised is a right lost."

I know its harder to do than to say. Trust me.
 
If the cops start searching and you DON'T tell them to stop, it is assumed you are agreeing to allow them to search.

They are fishing when they dig into the car...but they will keep on until you stay stop. (At which point they may continue but anything they find after that will be inadmissable in court)

In the same way they want to keep you talking , and they will keep at it until you stop. They never know when you will make some sort of statement they can use to get you on something. Again, until they arrest you they aren't going to say 'you are free to be quiet' YOU need to assert that you don't want to continue the discussion.


Now, the whole 'Am I under arrest? am I free to go? I want to talk to my lawyer" is a little bit too simple when you are pulled over.




REMEMBER refusing a search or saying "no warrant no search" or anything like that WILL NOT STOP A COP...but it will stop a conviction.

Unfortunately, there is no real penalty for a cop who is doing an illegal search.
When operating a motorvehicle, it is "would you like my license and insurance officer?" but beyond that do not get involved talking to him. If he says "why were you in such a rush? got any beer in here? do you do drugs? what you doing out so late?" then you say "what can I do to help officer?"

if and when he asks you to get out of the car, THEN you go into "Am I being detained? Am I free to go? For what am I being detained? I want to talk to my lawyer!"
 
Last edited:
The ASP is a batton which in most states is a fellony to possesss w/o a lic.
Click to expand...

Really? Where is that law?
Click to expand...

This is what I thought, no one can find such a law in "most states."

Kind of like the people who claim that it is illegal to own throwing stars, or to tie a hangman's noose with 13 wraps. People constantly talk about such laws, but can never produce them.
 
Since you keep a pistol in a center console, you should invest in the lock which must be optional for it.

When the pistol is in the console you should have it locked and with the key in place.

In the event you are forced to leave the vehical, lock the consol, and then the door. That would be 2 locks anyone must pass to just 'discover' anything.

Other wise follow Treo's wisdoms..
 
All of this "ASSERT YOUR RIGHTS" stuff seems like a logical way to deal with the police who abuse their power, until you actually try it.

I was arrested for "asserting my rights" as "interfering with a police investigation."

Not to be a jerk, but most of that advice is just armchair quarterbacking. The only advise I will agree with is to keep your mouth shut and don't physically resist anything.
 
This is what I thought, no one can find such a law in "most states."

Kind of like the people who claim that it is illegal to own throwing stars,
Click to expand...

Perhaps those people are in CA.

Both batons and throwings stars are criminal offenses in CA. Batons are covered under California's legal definition (several of which are not the dictionary definition) of "billy".
Throwing stars are specificly outlawed.

In CA carrying any object for use as a blunt weapon is a crime, and can be charged as a felony. Whether it is a bat, a lock on a bicycle chain (case law specificly deals with such an incident that creates precedent) a stick, or even a perfectly legal object intended for use as a weapon.
Items with no purpose other than a blunt weapon are automaticly a crime.
However legal items carried for use as a weapon must be proven to have been carried for use as a weapon (and saying you carry it for self defense, or could use it for defense is the most common admission of guilt to carrying it as a potential weapon.)
It does not have to be used in any crime or be intended to be used in any crime. Just possession is a felony.
The legal definition of sap, slungshot, sandclub, or billy is very different than the dictionary meaning or even the meaning of those terms in some other state laws. It also includes "leaded cane" which does not mean "leaded" cane but any object made heavier to strike better.
The specific definition given in the penal code and backed by case law covers any object intended to be used as a blunt weapon. Sandclub and sap are defined as practicly anything heavy, or weighted for use as a weapon.
A purse made heavier with change for example qualifies as a sap or sandclub if intentional done for use as a weapon.
I would copy the legal definition here, but it is long, and then I would also have to cite relevant case law, which is tiresome and long even in summary.
However to keep it simple, any blunt item clearly meant to be or designed as a weapon is automaticly a crime.
Any regular item not designed as a weapon (like a flashlight, bat, chain, roll of coins, rock etc) is a crime if the person intends to use it as a weapon. Even if you say you carry the flashlight to see in the dark, and in case someone attacks you, you just admited to a felony. Ever even mentioning its use for defense or as a weapon makes it a crime.

Much of it but not all is covered under the laws in PC12020.

Ironicly it is legal to keep an axe intended to be used as a weapon. Or a sword or massive knife intended to be used as a weapon (open carry only to avoid violation of "dirk law".) But carrying a flashlight for use in self defense would be a felony.
Why do you have that sword on your waist? "To cut anyone that attacks me in half" would be a perfectly legal response (though not wise.)

The law is the law, when you start thinking it makes logical sense and you don't need the details you will get into trouble with it.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps those people are in CA.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. The poster claimed "most states."

I would agree that CA, NJ, IL, and the other worker's paradise states might have restrictions, but those states don't allow CCW at all.
 
I would agree that CA, NJ, IL, and the other worker's paradise states might have restrictions, but those states don't allow CCW at all.
Click to expand...
Actualy CA has had CCW longer than most states, because it has been licensing the "right" much longer (rather than denying it as many states had, because many other states believed open carry was honest and concealed dishonest).
So even when open carry was legal in most of the nation, and concealed prohibited in much of the nation, CA allowed both until a politician decided to require a license to carry concealed.
Hispanic and asian immigrants were the reason for most of CA weapon laws, including the ban on concealed carry without a license which previously had been legal until the 1920s.


Most citizens of the state today just cannot aquire a CCW because they are "may issue" on a county basis. Most of the population lives in populous counties that only issue a handful of CCWs to the elite of society, those who have connections to them, and some celebrities.


Here is a great article on it:
http://californiaccw.org/files/sf-chronicle-article.htm

It is also when blunt weapons became a felony. Both CCW licensing and blunt weapons becoming felony happened under the same law in 1924.
Open carry remained legal until the civil rights era.
Text such as:
Possible unconstitutionality of the provision against possession of weapons by non-naturalized residents was admitted in McKissick's letter to the Governor urging signing of the bill, but he pointed out that if this clause should be held invalid the rest of the act will not be affected and that if it can be sustained that it will have a "salutary effect in checking tong wars among the Chinese and vendettas among our people who are of Latin descent."
Click to expand...
Translation:
'So it may be unconstiutional, but lets pass it anyways because it will have good results.'
See where that leads?
They were essentialy anti gang laws of immigrant gangs.

Armed blacks marching around is why CA and then many other portions of America created laws regarding open carry.
That was in the 1960s.

So it was all done under the pretense of keeping the "good people" armed and not others. Outlaw weapons prefered by some groups (like oriental weapons) while still allowing "law abiding citizens" to get a permit to be armed.
Over time most places in CA just stopped issuing the permits to the average person.

It was racist and wrong, but to give perspective to the times immigrant minorities were commiting most of the violent crime at the time. Just like most criminal gangs today.
Which generaly has always been the case in this nation of immigrants. Whether it was the Irish gangs in the 1800s or the Oriental gangs in the early 1900s, the Latin gangs, the Italian gangs etc.
The latest wave of immigrants is always poor, and violent crime is usualy most comon in those neighborhoods filled with people clawing thier way out of poverty.


So keep that in mind when bills to fight crime are introduced. They may even really target legitimate problems at the time.
That does not mean they won't be used to reduce the rights of everyone over time. What can be done to anyone can be done to everyone.
 
Last edited:
All of this "ASSERT YOUR RIGHTS" stuff seems like a logical way to deal with the police who abuse their power, until you actually try it.
Click to expand...
Let’s see who might that be directed at?

How many ways can I say this? I’m not talking about arguing W/ the cops or being Billy Badass, I’m talking about protecting yourself.

I’m not saying be rude to the police be very polite but firm,
If I get pulled over I ask the cop why he pulled me over before he ever opens his mouth; it ends the getcha gotcha games before they ever start. Anything bigger than a traffic stop and it would behoove me to avail myself of every protection offered me by the Constitution. How hard is it to say officer I want to speak to a lawyer before I answer any questions?

I was arrested for "asserting my rights" as "interfering with a police investigation."
Click to expand...
I promise there is more to this story than we’re being told you can not be arrested for invoking your right to remain silent or your right to counsel, you might be arrested for trying to physically resist a search

Not to be a jerk, but most of that advice is just armchair quarterbacking
Click to expand...
No, It’s really not I learned this stuff the hard way and almost spent 25 years in a federal prison learning it
 
hmm

did the cop get a flashlight close to your face when you rolled down window? around here they have flashlights with sniffers to detect alcohol. instant probable cause.


so lets recap guy had a beer and a half got caught speeding. he didn't follow the sage advice of the "us against the man" folks. was civil and treated the same. passed the field test and got to go home. i mighta missed it did he get the speeding ticket? he kept his gun his dignity and didn't have to be any kinda poseur. win for all sides
 
§ 46.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
(1) "Club" means an instrument that is specially
designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of inflicting serious
bodily injury or death by striking a person with the instrument, and
includes but is not limited to the following:
(A) blackjack;
(B) nightstick;
(C) mace;
(D) tomahawk.

§ 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits
an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on
or about his person a handgun, illegal knife, or club.
(b) Except as provided by Subsection (c), an offense under
this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(c) An offense under this section is a felony of the third
degree if the offense is committed on any premises licensed or
issued a permit by this state for the sale of alcoholic beverages.


guess what state
 
Texas. You left out the rest of the law:

Sec. 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:

(1) on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control; or

(2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under the person's control.
Click to expand...

Also, the statement was that an Asp is illegal to own. Under TX law it is illegal to carry, not possess. You also left out:

(b) Section 46.02 does not apply to a person who:

(1) is in the actual discharge of official duties as a member of the armed forces or state military forces as defined by Section 431.001, Government Code, or as a guard employed by a penal institution;

(2) is on the person's own premises or premises under the person's control unless the person is an employee or agent of the owner of the premises and the person's primary responsibility is to act in the capacity of a security guard to protect persons or property, in which event the person must comply with Subdivision (5);

(3) is traveling;
(4) is engaging in lawful hunting, fishing, or other sporting activity on the immediate premises where the activity is conducted, or is en route between the premises and the actor's residence, if the weapon is a type commonly used in the activity;
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Disturbing traffic stop... Big rant.
Replies
10
Views
882
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
T
  • Locked
Traffic Stop AAR
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
3K
Brian Williams
Brian Williams
L
  • Locked
Traffic stop legality question
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
NavyLCDR
N
L
  • Locked
Being disarmed during a traffic stop?
Replies
11
Views
788
Art Eatman
A
L
  • Locked
Traffic Stop
Replies
13
Views
1K
Art Eatman
A
Back
Top