Being pulled over while carrying

[HiRoller]

I guess would say I trust his 25 years of experience on the Police Force and thought he handled the situation well.

As far as stupid goes, (personally) I live by the notion that if I could "flash my weapon" and defuse a situation without firing it and possibly have to explain myself later to the law, I would.

 

[VUPDblue]

I meant that the wording of the law was stupid.

 

[indyjoe]

Put yourself in the leo's position, just because you have a LTCH does not make you any less of a threat, no matter who you are. In his mind you have a weapon, you may have done something and might use it to keep from getting caught.

I would argue that having an LTCH WOULD make you less of a threat. You have gone through the process of following the law and understanding what it is AND showed the officer respect by indicating him that you are carrying. If you had nefarious ideas, you would have done none of these, even if you were the bad apple LTCH you are alluding to.

 

[Ashkelon]

Most officers in today's world will ask if there are any weapons or contraband in the car if they are the slightest bit suspicious of the person they are pulling over. If asked - disclose- even if you are pulled over for a speeding ticket and feel the officer is over stepping his bounds for an infraction stop. I personally would not disclose unless asked as it will do nothing but delay the stop for another 20 minutes. You know when you have done wrong by speeding or an illegal lane change - just own up to it - take responsibility - and the gun issue 99% of the time won't come up.

BTW if you were stopped in Avon and the officer said he was looking for a car like yours but he still took your license to run and you believe him I would like to sell you some oceanfront property in southern Indiana.

 

[henktermaat]

I was pulled over last week for cutting too close thru a yellow light. My loaded was 9 at my right hip, inside the waistband. When he came to the window, I had my wallet opened on the steering wheel with my hands prepared to get my ID out. He didn't ask, and I didn't tell. I was polite and guns never came up.

 

[Goodcat]

I was once in a car that was pulled over. The cop seemed young. I went for some chapstick after about 15 minutes of another officer searching a friend of mine and heard a "stop, freeze!" I looked up and realized what I had done. *idiot me!* I apologized and explained I was only getting my chapstick. The cop said sorry for yelling but that he gets nervous. Understand able! that was stupid on my part. I told him if he was nervous, I was nervous because he had the gun. He then very toughly explained he wasn't nervous anyways cause he had 18 in the mag with 2 spares. lol I'd assume make no police officer nervous for any reason. In their line of work, that's what saves their lives.

 

[IndyBeerman]

I would argue that having an LTCH WOULD make you less of a threat. You have gone through the process of following the law and understanding what it is AND showed the officer respect by indicating him that you are carrying. If you had nefarious ideas, you would have done none of these, even if you were the bad apple LTCH you are alluding to.

Unfortunately in today's real world you may be less of a threat, but all it takes is the one who's not quite right on kilter and off balance.
There could be that one person who is a LTCH and went to the dark side because of a stupid thing he has done, and hope for a officer to drop his guard and see his opportunity to strike.

This will never happen with 99.9% of us, but it will be that .01 that can get that officer killed and that's what is probably in the back of all their minds.

I see both sides and it all boils down to him having to have control of the situation for his own protection, no matter what you or I think.

 

[Soundslikejosh]

<snip> My friend replied with his hands locked to the wheel " I'm a police officer and I am carrying a loaded handgun, this is my friend on the passenger side, he is also carrying a loaded handgun". <snip>

This brings up a good point. Mind your own business. I don't care if you know me, I don't care if you know I am carrying. I am my own man, don't impose your values on me by disclosing any of my information. I will choose for myself what I will or won't say. Further, the LEO is able to ask for himself if he is concerned. This is one of those occasions where you should have a nice hot bowl of STFU.

Sorry for coming out of the gate strong, but this kind of thing really agitates mean. Mind your own business.

 

[public servant]

I would argue that having an LTCH WOULD make you less of a threat.

I would argue that the murderer of Officer Timothy "Jake" Laird owned his weapons legally. Any nut can legally own a firearm. I'm not taking any chances. If any of you think your "right" to keep your firearm a secret is worth the next "Jake's" life.....ask Jake's widow and daughter. Your inconvenience doesn't really amount to much. IMO

RIP Jake. (C421)

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God" (Matthew 5:9).

 

[Engine03]

As a ex leo I can say that i appreciated disclosure of a firearm. One thing I did was to always ask if there are any weapons in the car or on your person. I always took the weapon (with out any muzzle sweep) and secured it. As was stated in a earlier post you dont know the frame of mind of the person you have just met or there past. When returning to the vehicle I handed the weapon back unloaded with the bullets in a zip lock bag. I asked that the weapon not be reloaded untill they departed. I would stay in my car behind them until they departed the scene. As to people with a ltch in my short stint as a leo I found one stolen firearm and three ltch that had been revoked for felony convictions. Just seeing a pink slip gives you no piece of mind to the mind set of the person who is in control of the firearm.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Unfortunately in today's real world you may be less of a threat, but all it takes is the one who's not quite right on kilter and off balance.
There could be that one person who is a LTCH and went to the dark side because of a stupid thing he has done, and hope for a officer to drop his guard and see his opportunity to strike.

This will never happen with 99.9% of us, but it will be that .01 that can get that officer killed and that's what is probably in the back of all their minds.

I see both sides and it all boils down to him having to have control of the situation for his own protection, no matter what you or I think.

Fair enough. Now, just for fun (and I use that term with extreme sarcasm), switch the abbreviations LEO and LTCH in the above paragraph. Now explain to me again why it's appropriate for a LEO to disarm someone who has shown no propensity toward violence. If you prefer, explain why that's more appropriate than the average peaceable and law-abiding citizen, armed or not, doing the same in reverse.

I do not have a citation to back this up, I do know I've read that the ratio of LTCH holders who commit crimes (not traffic infractions) to the total vs. the number of LEOs who commit crimes to their total indicates that the LTCH holder is the more law-abiding of the two. (Anyone who has such a citation of fact and wishes to post it, please do. PM is OK, too.)

Let me be clear: As I've said many times, I respect those LEOs who honor their sworn oath and take it to heart. I will not intentionally give them any problems, but neither will I give them more than their due, and by that I mean that they are men and women, not super-beings, not any better or worse than any of the rest of us. The difference is what they wear to work and the fact that their work clothes include a metal star or shield. In no way do I mean any negativity or belittling by saying this, it's merely the truth.

I don't plan to engage in any resistance on the side of the road, but violations of my rights will be addressed with an attorney, and if in his/her opinion I have a solid case, they will be addressed in front of a judge.



Blessings,
Bill

 

[Glock Lover]

Fair enough. Now, just for fun (and I use that term with extreme sarcasm), switch the abbreviations LEO and LTCH in the above paragraph. Now explain to me again why it's appropriate for a LEO to disarm someone who has shown no propensity toward violence. If you prefer, explain why that's more appropriate than the average peaceable and law-abiding citizen, armed or not, doing the same in reverse.

I do not have a citation to back this up, I do know I've read that the ratio of LTCH holders who commit crimes (not traffic infractions) to the total vs. the number of LEOs who commit crimes to their total indicates that the LTCH holder is the more law-abiding of the two. (Anyone who has such a citation of fact and wishes to post it, please do. PM is OK, too.)

Let me be clear: As I've said many times, I respect those LEOs who honor their sworn oath and take it to heart. I will not intentionally give them any problems, but neither will I give them more than their due, and by that I mean that they are men and women, not super-beings, not any better or worse than any of the rest of us. The difference is what they wear to work and the fact that their work clothes include a metal star or shield. In no way do I mean any negativity or belittling by saying this, it's merely the truth.

I don't plan to engage in any resistance on the side of the road, but violations of my rights will be addressed with an attorney, and if in his/her opinion I have a solid case, they will be addressed in front of a judge.



Blessings,
Bill

You are right, we are not super human, and we are just men and women. But......there is more difference than just a shield and the uniform. That's just ignorant. Lets compare work days sometime, SERIOUSLY, come on now.
The Officer Down Memorial Page, Inc.

 

[fpdshooter]

This brings up a good point. Mind your own business. I don't care if you know me, I don't care if you know I am carrying. I am my own man, don't impose your values on me by disclosing any of my information. I will choose for myself what I will or won't say. Further, the LEO is able to ask for himself if he is concerned. This is one of those occasions where you should have a nice hot bowl of STFU.

Sorry for coming out of the gate strong, but this kind of thing really agitates mean. Mind your own business.

If you are in MY car then you ARE my business. The driver is responsible for knowing what is going on in his car. You may not like it, but that is the way it is. Case law supports this.

Maybe you should soften up your stance a bit.

 

[Glock Lover]

If you are in MY car then you ARE my business. The driver is responsible for knowing what is going on in his car. You may not like it, but that is the way it is. Case law supports this.

Maybe you should soften up your stance a bit.

Good point. Guns, drugs, alcohol. It's in your car...you are busted. "But, but, someone must have put that there....Sucks to be you".

 

[HICKMAN]

From the Indiana State Police website

Does Indiana statute require me to carry the handgun on my person concealed or
exposed?
Indiana law is silent on this issue; however, carrying an exposed weapon in public may
alarm some people. Also, the right to carry a firearm may be restricted on private
property and businesses by the owners. Be attentive for signs warning of restricted
areas when carrying firearms into public places. If approached by law enforcement for
official business such as traffic stops or complaint related inquiries, it is recommended
that you tell the officer in a non-threatening manner that you are carrying a weapon or
have a weapon in the vehicle and that you have a valid permit. A law enforcement
officer does have the right to inspect the permit.

of course, that's only a recommendation

 

[Pull Trigger Goes Bang]

When returning to the vehicle I handed the weapon back unloaded with the bullets in a zip lock bag. I asked that the weapon not be reloaded untill they departed. I would stay in my car behind them until they departed the scene.

Asking that the weapon not be reloaded until the cop departs, that sounds reasonable to me.

Asking that the weapon not be reloaded until I depart from them, not so much. What am I supposed to do, reload driving down the road? That's about the most dangerous driving-while-______ activity I can imagine.

 

[clt46910]

The one time I was stopped while carrying, I showed him my license and permit at the same time. (I carry them in a double window case that shows both the same time)

Was asked where it was. Answered him on my right hip. He said fine, just leave it there and thanked me for telling him. He gave me a warning for speeding for being honest with him. At least that is what he said.

I really think it is because I look a lot like Santa and he did not want to get on the bad list...LOL

 

[Engine03]

Asking that the weapon not be reloaded until the cop departs, that sounds reasonable to me.

Asking that the weapon not be reloaded until I depart from them, not so much. What am I supposed to do, reload driving down the road? That's about the most dangerous driving-while-______ activity I can imagine.

The road ways are not safe to start with it is reasonable for the occupant to pull off into a parking lot to reload or for most people put the other loaded mag into the gun. lol

 

[Metro 40]

.

 

[joegrunt]

A few weeks ago I ask this question to an officer here in Evansville. He informed me that when he pulled someone over, he ran the tags. If they had a LTCH, it would come back (guess they cross reference it?).

He also said that even though you do not have to state if you are carrying or not, most officers appreciate it if you do tell them as they approach. And also to keep your hands on the wheel.