Telling LEO there's a gun....

[Witness]

i've only been stopped a hand full of times, usually for fund raiser reasons, and as soon as i see those lights i get my paper work out before i even come to a stop. i dont volunteer any information whatsoever and if i get out of the car i'm locking the door and putting my keys in my pocket. if i am outside the vehicle and i'm asked if there are any guns in the car my answer is a simple "yes", if they ask if they can see its a simple "no thank you". i'd prefer not to have to deal with the hassle of someone waving my gun around on the side of the road trying to call in my numbers. besides, there is a bit of a legal gray area when it comes to running those numbers. i'm not entirely sure that they are even able to without PC or consent.

before an LEO chimes in and says they have to check every gun through NCIC per department orders, i'm well aware of that and im not pointing fingers. i just want to see where LEO's have the power to do this without probable cause or consent by the owner.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

i've only been stopped a hand full of times, usually for fund raiser reasons, and as soon as i see those lights i get my paper work out before i even come to a stop. i dont volunteer any information whatsoever and if i get out of the car i'm locking the door and putting my keys in my pocket. if i am outside the vehicle and i'm asked if there are any guns in the car my answer is a simple "yes", if they ask if they can see its a simple "no thank you". i'd prefer not to have to deal with the hassle of someone waving my gun around on the side of the road trying to call in my numbers. besides, there is a bit of a legal gray area when it comes to running those numbers. i'm not entirely sure that they are even able to without PC or consent.

before an LEO chimes in and says they have to check every gun through NCIC per department orders, i'm well aware of that. i want to see where LEO's have the power to do this without probable cause or consent by the owner.

It;s the same legal basis as why we can run your plates without PC or consent. Hence all the LPR cars and stationary cameras. Running the plate can create the PC, but there is no PC needed to run it.

 

[Witness]

It;s the same legal basis as why we can run your plates without PC or consent. Hence all the LPR cars and stationary cameras. Running the plate can create the PC, but there is no PC needed to run it.

duh, its in plain view. now if my gun was duct taped to my license plate then i wouldnt have a problem with it. so its not the same legal basis. two completely different things.

what im geting at is, what happens if someone you stop tells you that you cant see their gun?

 

[Nolacopusmc]

duh, its in plain view. now if my gun was duct taped to my license plate then i wouldnt have a problem with it. so its not the same legal basis. two completely different things.

what im geting at is, what happens if someone you stop tells you that you cant see their gun?

Well, duh, under your you stated scenerio, if you got out of your car, locked the door, and the weapon was inside, without consent or probable cause, the leo would not be able to go into your vehicle to see it.

However, be advised that when you receive a traffic citation, you are being released in lieu of an arrest for whatever the charge is. So, if he really wanted to be an ass, he could just take you to jail for almost any traffic violation other than seatbelt and then search your vehicle incident to that arrest.

Granted, that would be a little overzealous on the part of the leo, but I am sure if you were less than cooperative, he could exercise that discretion and physically arrest you if he chose.

Would I do it, probably not, but it could be done nder the right circumstances.

 

[Witness]

that doesnt make since. you cant search someones car without probable cause, consent, or a warrant. a traffic violation is not probable cause for search. if that were the case then what are warrants for? why would you need to call in a drug dog to gain probable cause for search when drugs are suspected, why not just arrest the subject and search the vehicle in lieu of said arrest?

 

[Nolacopusmc]

that doesnt make since. you cant search someones car without probable cause, consent, or a warrant. a traffic violation is not probable cause for search. if that were the case then what are warrants for? why would you need to call in a drug dog to gain probable cause for search when drugs are suspected, why not just arrest the subject and search the vehicle in lieu of said arrest?

because most traffic stops are just that. If nothing else is found, then you will receive a citation in lieu of arrest and released on your signature which is a promise to appear. Otherwise, the jails would be full of speeders.

For example, you are pulled over for speeding. Leo smells burnt marijuana. Asks for consent, you say no. Ok, you are under arrest for speeding. You are handcuffed, placed in car, and vehicle is searched. If no drugs are found, you go tto jail or receive a citation for speeding. If they are found, you get the added charge of possession and you are either go to jail or receive a citation and a summons for the possession. his discretion in most cases. Obviously, any weapons found will be run, and the additional charge of firearms in possesion with drugs could apply.

Also, depending on your behavior immediately before the stop, such as reaching under the seat, going into the glove box, etc. your immediate area inside the vehicle can be searched for officer safety (called the "wingspan"). this generally does not include closed compartments like locked glove boxes, trunks, etc. If you are placed under physical arrest rather than receiving a citation, your vehicle will be searched incident to that arrest for contraband and inventoried if it will be towed from the location of arrest.

The typical concept of getting a search warrant on a traffic stop is a TV thing. There is no need for a warrant for a dog search. As long as it is does not take an "unreasonable amount of time" if the K9 alerts, there is probable cause independently from the dog to search.

Of course, most of the time, you will simply get you citation or warning and be on your way.

 

[Witness]

because most traffic stops are just that. If nothing else is found, then you will receive a citation in lieu of arrest and released on your signature which is a promise to appear. Otherwise, the jails would be full of speeders.

For example, you are pulled over for speeding. Leo smells burnt marijuana. Asks for consent, you say no. Ok, you are under arrest for speeding. You are handcuffed, placed in car, and vehicle is searched. If no drugs are found, you go tto jail or receive a citation for speeding. If they are found, you get the added charge of possession and you are either go to jail or receive a citation and a summons for the possession. his discretion in most cases. Obviously, any weapons found will be run, and the additional charge of firearms in possesion with drugs could apply.

Also, depending on your behavior immediately before the stop, such as reaching under the seat, going into the glove box, etc. your immediate area inside the vehicle can be searched for officer safety (called the "wingspan"). this generally does not include closed compartments like locked glove boxes, trunks, etc. If you are placed under physical arrest rather than receiving a citation, your vehicle will be searched incident to that arrest for contraband and inventoried if it will be towed from the location of arrest.

The typical concept of getting a search warrant on a traffic stop is a TV thing. There is no need for a warrant for a dog search. As long as it is does not take an "unreasonable amount of time" if the K9 alerts, there is probable cause independently from the dog to search.

Of course, most of the time, you will simply get you citation or warning and be on your way.

you cannot search someone's vehicle without a warrant or consent. i do believe that we have the 4th amendment to thank for that.

if you do believe that a traffic violation gives you the power to arrest someone then search their car WITHOUT a warrant, WITHOUT probable cause or WITHOUT consent, i would love to see where that power is granted.

i'm sorry, but a traffic violation simply is not enough to search private property.

 

[Witness]

For example, you are pulled over for speeding. Leo smells burnt marijuana. Asks for consent, you say no. Ok, you are under arrest for speeding. You are handcuffed, placed in car, and vehicle is searched. If no drugs are found, you go tto jail or receive a citation for speeding. If they are found, you get the added charge of possession and you are either go to jail or receive a citation and a summons for the possession. his discretion in most cases. Obviously, any weapons found will be run, and the additional charge of firearms in possesion with drugs could apply.

that is a warrant less search. you do that to wrong person and you will be sued untill the end of time. my father who is an attorney of almost 40 years is beside himself at this comment.

 

[charlie12]

that is a warrant less search. you do that to wrong person and you will be sued untill the end of time. my father who is an attorney of almost 40 years is beside himself at this comment.

The would say they are doing an inventory of the car for the wrecker.

 

[charlie12]

I dont remember how many times i have told an officer there is a gun in my truck, and every time the officer asks where and says can i get out, then asks, can i run the numbers... blah blah.. now wtf kind of douchebag is gonna alert a cop to a gun that is hidden and he will never find if its stolen or just killed a guy 2 blocks over??

You get pulled over too much.

 

[dantheman]

I am NOT volunteering that info if I am not asked . I will have no reason to go into my glovebox or console . I have been packing a gun in my vehicle for over 33 yrs. and I'm not going to change the way I do business .

 

[Narco]

you cannot search someone's vehicle without a warrant or consent. i do believe that we have the 4th amendment to thank for that.

if you do believe that a traffic violation gives you the power to arrest someone then search their car WITHOUT a warrant, WITHOUT probable cause or WITHOUT consent, i would love to see where that power is granted.

i'm sorry, but a traffic violation simply is not enough to search private property.

I think we need to start a new thread for this discussion... Please fasten seat belts, as turbulence is expected.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

I am NOT volunteering that info if I am not asked . I will have no reason to go into my glovebox or console . I have been packing a gun in my vehicle for over 33 yrs. and I'm not going to change the way I do business .

Well good for you sir. No one suggested you do otherwise. Keep up the good work.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

I think we need to start a new thread for this discussion... Please fasten seat belts, as turbulence is expected.

You can. I don't have time to go into the search incident to arrest concept. Besides, his dad's a lawyer. How could I even try?

Witness, do what you want brother. I only have about 6000 traffic stops to go off of, but you may be right. I guess the 100+ or so people I arrested on traffic stops will be set free soon and they will all sue me.

The question was do you have to tell. No you don't. It is a good idea unless you are a hardnose rights fundamentalists. Sometimes, it is just easier to play along to get along.

I do the same thing when i am stopped. I let the guy do his job and try not to give him any flak. Everyone wins.

 

[charlie12]

Ya'll should drive better and not get stopped in the first place.

 

[dantheman]

Well good for you sir. No one suggested you do otherwise. Keep up the good work.

Actually , you and a few others HAVE advocated doing otherwise .

 

[Nolacopusmc]

Actually , you and a few others HAVE advocated doing otherwise .

Touche'

 

[W1nds0rF0x]

Ya'll should drive better and not get stopped in the first place.

Sometimes that is hard to do with *some" officers in particular. I had an on going "incident" with a particular BRPD officer in about 1994 and it took a major complaint ti IA and calling my old Boy Scout leader to get his @$$ off of me.

Then there was the very young EBRSO deputy that stopped me as I went from College to Lee and accused me of drag racing some guy in a Firebird. I just told him "Son, if I had been drag racing that Firebird, you'd be back here talking to him right now instead of me."

 

[Bullet]

For example, you are pulled over for speeding. Leo smells burnt marijuana. Asks for consent, you say no. Ok, you are under arrest for speeding. You are handcuffed, placed in car, and vehicle is searched. If no drugs are found, you go tto jail or receive a citation for speeding. If they are found, you get the added charge of possession and you are either go to jail or receive a citation and a summons for the possession. his discretion in most cases.

Something that puzzles me when consent is requested to search. I've read on a police department's online manuel (I don't recall the department, maybe in New Mexico) that consent can only be given of the person is free to leave. Any truth to that in Louisiana or the NOPD?

 

[flamatrix99]

We've established that you are not required to tell a LEO that you are carrying. I guess what I don't understand is that if you not a criminal what is the harm in telling him?