Mandatory Notification at traffic stop??

[Metro 40]

.

 

[Soundslikejosh]

Metro 40- Great posts here. Its nice to have this discussion with someone who is level headed and has some explanation for their actions.

 

[hoosiertriangle]

Thanks Metro 40 for writing and communicating so well. You do an extremely tough job without enough thanks. Please keep letting us know your thoughts, opinions, and insight!

 

[ashylarry]

I was pulled over the other day and I gave them my LTCH and told them i had a couple guns in the car and he was cool about it. Had me get out of the car while he ran my license and let me go. He didn't go check the guns or anything.

 

[Metro 40]

.

 

[Bigum1969]

First of all, if you were really disarmed and a bunch of deputies were playing with your pistol and pointing it at traffic, they need their badges taken away and their asses kicked.

And now....on to the main question!

In reality, you cannot decline to be disarmed, IF you are stopped for a violation of the law. During that time period, you are technically in the custody of the LEO. You are not free to leave. The officer must conduct his/her business in a timely manner, and cannot hold you for an inordinate amount of time....but during the time that you are stopped, the officer is in charge of the investigation.

You can politely state your objections to being disarmed, mentioning safety as a reason. Police are people too, and you'd be surprised how reasonable we can be. But in the end, the courts have always ruled in favor of officer safety when it comes to investigatory stops. The courts often use a "reasonableness" test, and balance the needs of effective law enforcement against the rights enumerated in the Constitution.

Over and over, the courts have held that there is a reduced expectation of privacy in a motor vehicle on a public roadway. This is why a search of a vehicle can be conducted based on probable cause alone, without a search warrant, due to the mobile nature of the vehicle and relatively public setting that a motorist operates in. In contrast, a search warrant would almost always be required to search a home, where the expectation of privacy is very high.

Making the comment that you don't consent to searches or seizures has no bearing at all. You've already consented to a seizure by stopping your car for the red and blue lights. The only thing that refusing to consent to a search does is get evidence thrown out of court if contraband is found during an illegal search. So, if you've got a legal pistol, there's nothing to be charged and nothing to be thrown out of court. The officer will give you a ticket or warning, give back your pistola, and you'll be on your way.

Please understand that MOST officers want law-abiding citizens to have the means to protect themselves. (ie: LTCH) I even agree that we should not even have a permit system...ala Vermont, as long as we have a way to try to prevent felons from obtaining firearms. Still, Indiana's system is not too bad....better than a lot of states.

I'm sure that some people will not like what I've typed....but I'm just trying to relay the law as I've been trained, along with the perception from my point of view, and hopefully a little bit of insight into why we do things the way that we do. Just remember that YMMV one HELL of a lot when you start throwing in "what-ifs" and different departments, different jurisdictions, different laws, different attitudes, etc.....

I echo what others have said... thanks for the responses. It is great to hear from a LEO about this (and other) issues. I think your participation on this forum will be much appreciated.

I have a question though. Do most of your fellow officers understand Indiana's firearm laws as it relates to carrying? We hear many stories about LEOs not understanding the laws regarding open carrying, etc.

 

[bwframe]

(Although some flame wars, glock vs. XD, etc. are fun. )

So why would anyone want one of those Tupperware guns?

Just kidding sir. +1 on the thanks and compliments. Great info and level headed insight from "the man."

 

[Caleb]

Thanks for the compliments, all! (What is this strange, unfamiliar, warm & fuzzy feeling? LOL!) This is a good board....nice to be able to discuss things without it turning into a flame war. (Although some flame wars, glock vs. XD, etc. are fun. )

I hate glocks....but that's just my personal opinion.

 

[Metro 40]

.

 

[Coach]

We need to have a better permit than a pink piece of paper. Photo ID and the same material as a driver's license.

 

[Metro 40]

.

 

[Bigum1969]

It seems from the posts on this board that some officers are not adequately informed about the ins and outs of firearms laws. On my department (IMPD), it's been my experience that MOST of the officers I work with know and understand the laws related to carrying a firearm. We deal with citizens carrying firearms (both legally and not so legally) on a regular basis, given the nature of our patrol area. (big city) It's through this experience that officers become familiar with what's legal and what's not.

With a growing number of citizens obtaining a LTCH, most experienced officers across the state have had at least a few encounters with a legally armed citizens carrying concealed. What is NOT all that common is open carry. Some officers may mistake a LTCH for a concealed weapons permit. Therein lies the confusion when an officer thinks that open carry is illegal. It's just not something we see that often, and some officers are kind of caught off guard by the unusual sight of a pistol in plain view.

I'm lucky because I'm a supervisor, and I'm able to advise officers about relevant firearms laws when they encounter something that they are not sure of. So far, I haven't had any questions about open carry. I've had a couple of questions about whether an AK in the car was legal.

Also, you should be aware that not all cops are gun people. I would say that maybe 20% of the force is what you would call "knowledgeable" about firearms in general. The other portion are the ones who shoot exactly 2 times a year, for qualification. Sad, but true.

Rookies are more likely to be mistaken about firearms laws, due to lack of experience and the fact that many IMPD rookies have never fired a gun before they became police officers. (City slickers....pffffft. ) The academy teaches a wide variety of subjects....but the real learning takes time and happens on the street. That is why some officers may think that open carry is not legal. Their whole base of knowledge regarding firearms laws might be the 10 minute discussion in the academy 6 months ago.

Officers are trained in MANY different areas, and have to be in order to do the basic job on patrol. Just like any other profession, true competence only comes with experience and ongoing training. Much like a lawyer who is educated in all aspects of the law, he or she will only retain competence in his or her area of specialization, with perhaps a passing familiarity in other areas.

If you are hassled about open carrying, I'd call the department in question and ask to talk to a supervisor or the training officer. The only way that the department knows that their officers are acting on wrong info is to hear it from the public.

Thanks for the response.

It does make perfect sense about the learning curve. It sounds like you'd be one heck of a supervisor to learn from.

I have come to realize that some LEOs are not gun enthusiasts. One of the women I work with is married to a recently retired LEO. He doesn't even own a gun anymore. To each their own I suppose.

Again, thanks for insightful response.

 

[Caleb]

Oh yeah? Well Rugers are made from Bill Clinton's recycled toilet paper, steel from communist North Korea, and are tested on puppies.

Maybe so, but at least it ain't a paper weight.


I had a question, is there any law in Indianapolis prohibiting carrying (open or concealed)?

 

[Bubbajms]

That's very true, and something that lots of people don't realize. Just because you are a police officer doesn't mean you're a firearms enthusiast. I talk with several local LEOs on a fairly regular basis, and some of them are much more involved than others..

 

[Prometheus]

We need to have a better permit than a pink piece of paper. Photo ID and the same material as a driver's license.

No we don't. As metro pointed out, aside from faking concerns, they are routinely revoked and the holders never surrenders it.

Easy fix, as Metro and I agree on, got to vermont style carry. No permits or licenses needed. You get stopped, LEO runs your info and finds out if you are or aren't allowed to own one.

Metro:
Thanks for your candid answers. I appreciate it.

Also yes, two of them were transfixed by my brand new H&K USP 45 in stainless. Might have been the first one they've seen, lol. Rural road, but a car every 30 seconds or so. Not newbies either, around 40 both of them.. One was a supervisor.

 

[Metro 40]

.

 

[Caleb]

Just Rugers. No open carry, please. Think of the children!

Seriously, though.....nope, no ordinance that I'm aware of. A general local prohibition would be trumped by state law anyway, IMHO.

And I DO really like Rugers. I've got an SP-101 with Wolff springs and a Big Dot sight on my qualification list. Also own 2 GP-100s (one is the cool Lipsey's Target Gray model), a Redhawk .44 and of course, the obligatory 10/22 blued carbine. Looking to pick up a stainless 10/22 and a .44 Vaquero one day. If my checkbook ever stops bleeding.

I want a sp101 but I can't afford one right now...

Edit: I do tend to open carry btw...

 

[MACHINEGUN]

And sadly, I've locked up more than one person for both misdemeanors and felonies that were legally carrying a pistol with a valid LTCH.

I can understand if someone has a misdemeanor and they have the right to own or carry a firearm, but how is it possible anyone with a felony has a valid LTCH?

I assume you mean a felon who has slipped through the cracks?

 

[Bubbajms]

It sounded (to me, anyway) that he'd arrested people on felony charges that happened to have a LTCH..

 

[MACHINEGUN]

It sounded (to me, anyway) that he'd arrested people on felony charges that happened to have a LTCH..

I was thinking that also, but I had to ask.

Anyways...

Glocks rule.