+1 to Westfield Police

[INGunGuy]

To the OP do you open carry?(I open carry so im not saying u shouldnt) Maybe they saw you while you were out somewhere maybe?

Maybe someone called about a man with a gun and the stop was to look for your gun and not because of a signal.

Heres a question about telling the officer no I dont have a gun.

Wouldnt that be false informing or something and then his partner comes up on the pass side and says hes got a gun and then they are .
Im sure there is some charge they could stick you with if that happend.

The only time lying to the police is unlawful is making an official statement to the police. If you are just talking on the side of the road, and again IANAL, lying to the police is perfectly fine. If you are on the way to a ballet dance, and a LEO asks where you are going, and you are for whatever reason ashamed of going to the ballet, and you say you are going to a football game. Well then that is lying to the police, have you broken any law. Also by conversing with the police you are opening yourself up to scrutiny by the police. You say you are going to a game, well then they ask you about where the game is who is playing, etc... then they will converse a little more to make sure of your story... well it just opens up a whole can of worms when you tell the police ANYTHING more than what is specifically necessary for them to give you your ticket.

INGunGuy

 

[littletommy]

Do you carry with a round in the chamber? The reason I ask is I am very particular about where I load and unload my weapon (sand barrel in the garage), and I can't even fathom a cop, or anyone else doing this beside a busy highway. I've never understood the thought process that goes into making that decision.

 

[VERT]

Colt, I did'nt take it that way.
My comment was basically geared towards those who have not been in the situation and say that they would lie to the officer when asked about a weapon or not ALLOW an LEO to handle their weapon pretty bold statments in my opinion. I have two brother-in-laws that are LEO's so I can see things from both perspectives. Like I said just because you have a legal firearm doesn't mean that you won't use it. How is an LEO that dosn't know you from Jack supposed to trust that you won't shoot him because of a pink piece of paper. I also don't agree with them taking it either.

Can you say conundrum?

Yes it is a conundrum! I have a lot of friends who are LEO and I would never want them to do anything that would put them in unneccessary danger. But it is my opinion that handling unholstered handguns is dangerous. Don't get me wrong I have made some dumb mistakes when handling a firearm that would be considered unsafe. Not proud of that fact. But my LEO friends (that should know better) are always the first to want to take a gun out of its holster to show it to you. Just this weekend I had to tell my buddy to put his gun away since he didn't need to be handling it in my living room.

Law Enforcement has its risks, but so do lots of jobs. My friends are always quick to remind me of the peril they face everyday. Then I have to remind them that if you look at work related fatalities and injuries as a percentage law enforcement does not even make the top ten. Logging, fishing, trucking, sales involving travel, farming/ranching, agricultural workers are all higher. A lot of this is directly related to vehicular fatalities. Basically it is much more likely that I won't come home from work then them. That is not to belittle the risks they take, it is just that they are trained to deal with those risks.

As far as an officer seizing the gun. I am probably one of the few who does not see where an officer holding the gun during a stop is an illegal seizure. Afterall they do give it back. But holding the gun for officer safety is a weak excuse. Run the plates, run my license, check my insurance, call in my LTCH. If they have give probable cause to detain somebody, by all means hook em up and hold the weapon. (Better be able to justify it!) But if any LEOs are reading this, Please stop playing with the loaded guns.

 

[MinuteMan47]

"I have nothing illegal in my vehicle, Sir. Is this the reason you pulled me over?"

 

[Mr. Habib]

What is TERRY?

Terry v Ohio
A ruling by the SOCTUS concerning when a LEO can stop and frisk someone.

 

[INGunGuy]

As far as an officer seizing the gun. I am probably one of the few who does not see where an officer holding the gun during a stop is an illegal seizure. Afterall they do give it back.

The issue at hand is that because you do not see a officer seizing your gun during a stop as illegal is a moot point, Washington makes it illegal. Would you think it ok if I were to say because I dont think murdering people is illegal it should be ok? I wouldnt think so.... so why is a LEO breaking the law ok?

Just 2 more of my cents...

INGunGuy

 

[wlerner]

I must say I'm glad I found this site. There are some pretty interesting and insightful points of view. I'm sure there is a lot to learn here!

 

[pathfinder317]

Ok, for all of you that are saying "NO" and I would not allow an LEO to handle my weapon (Pathfinder and Mr. Habib) here is a question.

Have you ever been pulled over and told an officer no or defied his orders? and if so what was the outcome? I can't see an officer just letting you go on your merry way.

I NEVER said anything about not allowing an officer to handle my weapon, I simply said if I was asked if there was a weapon in the car I would answer NO, and yes I have done this, it's not an issue with me, I have had a license for close to 30 years and have only been asked twice.
I don't volunteer information, by the time the officer gets to the window I have my drivers license and registration in my hand, and I simply hand it to him/her.
I guess you would have to judge it by the officers attitude, I'm not sure what you mean by an officers orders, afterall this was only a traffic stop, what orders could he give ? "license and registration" is all he needs.
If this has become a standard question for a traffic stop now days I wouldn't know, I haven't been pulled over for many years.

 

[manygunsmike]

Look up the definition of weapon ... My answer to the Police is a firm NO ...!

manygunsmike

 

[Pocketman]

While the OP situation turned out well, without some reasonable suspicion of criminal behavior or other situation that endangers the officer and/or public, this is how it should occur.

Officer: "Good morning sir. Do you have any weapons?"
Driver: "Yes officer, I am carrying a handgun IWB."
Officer: "Please leave your firearm where it is and show me your DL, registration and LTCH."

And what's this crap about not loading until the officer is well down the road? If someone meant to do the officer harm (s)he certainly isn't going to comply with that request.

The flip side is, the officer is responsible for everyone's safety during the stop (s)he initiated. From that perspective, there is some validity to having all the weapons. I'm still not comfortable with the idea of handling someone else's firearm at the side of the road.

I think the root problem here is a lack of common protocol and expectations. If everyone, LEOs and LTCH holders, are all singing from the same hymnal, we'd all be safer in these situations. I hate to be mister doom and gloom, but something tragic is eventually going to happen in the name of "officer safety."

 

[INGunGuy]

While the OP situation turned out well, without some reasonable suspicion of criminal behavior or other situation that endangers the officer and/or public, this is how it should occur.

Officer: "Good morning sir. Do you have any weapons?"
Driver: "Yes officer, I am carrying a handgun IWB."
Officer: "Please leave your firearm where it is and show me your DL, registration and LTCH."

And what's this crap about not loading until the officer is well down the road? If someone meant to do the officer harm (s)he certainly isn't going to comply with that request.

The flip side is, the officer is responsible for everyone's safety during the stop (s)he initiated. From that perspective, there is some validity to having all the weapons. I'm still not comfortable with the idea of handling someone else's firearm at the side of the road.

I think the root problem here is a lack of common protocol and expectations. If everyone, LEOs and LTCH holders, are all singing from the same hymnal, we'd all be safer in these situations. I hate to be mister doom and gloom, but something tragic is eventually going to happen in the name of "officer safety."

The issue at hand is that Washington v Indiana makes it illegal for an officer to seize a gun absent any other PC or RAS of a crime being committed or about to be committed. So upon giving the LEO the LTCH, any seizure is illegal. Also anyone who knows anything about weapons knows a holstered weapon is a "safe" weapon and a unholstered weapon is an accident waiting to happen.

The lack of common sense with current LEO's is really scary. Why anyone would want to handle another person's weapon on the side of a busy street/highway is absolutely asinine.

Why is it that we as the citizens will be arrested for breaking the law, but a LEO wont? I mean there is already a LEO on here that refuses to arrest an officer for breaking the law, does that also mean that officer wont arrest me for breaking the law? I mean what is good for the goose should be good for the gander. And no I am not talking about speeding or running a damn stoplight. I am talking about something that has been ruled on by the INSC as illegal activities.

INGunGuy

 

[Tripp11]

Just curious, has anyone ever contacted their local police departments and talked to someone in authority (Chief, Lt, etc...) and asked them what their internal protocal would be? If so, would you post the responses and list the department?

I've considered writing the Fishers PD and asking them what they instruct their officers to do in a traffic stop situation.

 

[lashicoN]

Use your 5th Amendment right to protect your 4th and 2nd Amendment rights! Just politely inform them that you aren't going to have a conversation. Hand them your papers and inform them that they can write you a ticket, arrest you, or let you go.

 

[Denny347]

The issue at hand is that Washington v Indiana makes it illegal for an officer to seize a gun absent any other PC or RAS of a crime being committed or about to be committed. So upon giving the LEO the LTCH, any seizure is illegal. Also anyone who knows anything about weapons knows a holstered weapon is a "safe" weapon and a unholstered weapon is an accident waiting to happen.

The lack of common sense with current LEO's is really scary. Why anyone would want to handle another person's weapon on the side of a busy street/highway is absolutely asinine.

Why is it that we as the citizens will be arrested for breaking the law, but a LEO wont? I mean there is already a LEO on here that refuses to arrest an officer for breaking the law, does that also mean that officer wont arrest me for breaking the law? I mean what is good for the goose should be good for the gander. And no I am not talking about speeding or running a damn stoplight. I am talking about something that has been ruled on by the INSC as illegal activities.

INGunGuy

I bet most of the time, the officer asks and the person VOLUNTEERS to hand over the pistol. That is not addressed in this case. I believe this case only addresses the confiscation w/o permission. Permission trumps.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

I mean there is already a LEO on here that refuses to arrest an officer for breaking the law, does that also mean that officer wont arrest me for breaking the law? I mean what is good for the goose should be good for the gander. And no I am not talking about speeding or running a damn stoplight. I am talking about something that has been ruled on by the INSC as illegal activities.

INGunGuy

It was nice of you to take my explanation and twist my words around to fit your agenda.

 

[INGunGuy]

It was nice of you to take my explanation and twist my words around to fit your agenda.

It was NOT intended to twist YOUR words in any way, only how it is perfectly ok for a LEO to arrest a citizen and NOT another LEO for breaking the law.

INGunGuy

 

[INGunGuy]

I bet most of the time, the officer asks and the person VOLUNTEERS to hand over the pistol. That is not addressed in this case. I believe this case only addresses the confiscation w/o permission. Permission trumps.

So as I have stated, the answer is "NO there are no weapons in the vehicle" Yep, I am going to lie like a rug, nothing illegal about it.

INGunGuy

 

[Wingcollector]

New to the forum, interesting thread. I am more interested in the question as to how the officer knew to ask about the possible weapon ( sorry not up to speed on all the abbreviations yet). I know that a few months ago I was pulled over for a illegal u-turn, and I was NOT asked by IMPD about any weapons in the car, but at that time I didn't have a permit, but now that I have one, I will be? Mind you, it would only make sense, from their perspective, for the State Police to dump all that data into their system, and I guess I just assumed it would be. I have read on other national forums that many states put this info right on your drivers license. Does anyone know the real story here in Indiana ?
Paul

 

[rmabrey]

New to the forum, interesting thread. I am more interested in the question as to how the officer knew to ask about the possible weapon ( sorry not up to speed on all the abbreviations yet). I know that a few months ago I was pulled over for a illegal u-turn, and I was NOT asked by IMPD about any weapons in the car, but at that time I didn't have a permit, but now that I have one, I will be? Mind you, it would only make sense, from their perspective, for the State Police to dump all that data into their system, and I guess I just assumed it would be. I have read on other national forums that many states put this info right on your drivers license. Does anyone know the real story here in Indiana ?
Paul

Some departments have information from ISP, some dont.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

It was NOT intended to twist YOUR words in any way, only how it is perfectly ok for a LEO to arrest a citizen and NOT another LEO for breaking the law.

INGunGuy

So whose words were you twisting if not mine? I'm the only one that commented in the "INGO member in handcuffs" thread. Your avatar is a representation of ribbons/medals you earned during military service, right? From your military service you should know that there is something called chain-of-command and that people on the bottom rung of the chain usually don't perform functions reserved for those higher up the chain. Its not that it isn't ok for me to arrest another LEO, its just not my arrest to make.