Does LTCH = PC for entering vehicle ?

[Whosyer]

Long story, kinda short. Son was stopped for speeding by Purdue Police on new 231. Officer sees pink card in wallet. Officer -" You have a gun?". Son - "Yes". Officer -" Handgun ?" Son -"Yes". Officer - "Where is it ?" Son - "center console" Officer - " Step to the rear of vehicle". At this point there was some back and forth about officer safety, blah blah blah. Second officer was also there. Now, one would think that with "suspect" at rear of vehicle, and handgun in center console, everyone is safe. Nope. First officer then goes back to vehicle, enters it, retrieves handgun, drops mag, checks chamber Why? And did he have legal cause too. Son protested entire situation, except for speeding ticket, and did not consent to vehicle "search". He has already sent a lengthy email toChief Cox. And plans on talking to shift ssupervisor.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Forget talking to anyone. Lawyer up, immediately. LTCH is not grounds for search. Upon presenting it, all questioning regarding the firearm must cease.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

It is my understanding, the answer is no. I've read advice where people in such situations should have rolled his window up and locked his door as he exited.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Washington v State, 2010.

Son's 4th Amendment rights were violated. Consult an attorney.

 

[Whosyer]

It is my understanding, the answer is no. I've read advice where people in such situations should have rolled his window up and locked his door as he exited.

That is the advice I have given him, in case it ever happens again. He has also relocated his LTCH to a less conspicuous place in his wallet.

 

[dusterboy49]

The police in this instance had NO reasonable or probable cause to search your son's vehicle.
Contact an attorney ASAP.

 

[Leo]

Maybe tha officer was an obummer supporter and he is not limited to the laws of the land, but can violate anyone he wants.

 

[lonehoosier]

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...ulled-over-can-cop-go-my-car-take-my-gun.html

 

[Mgderf]

Purdue police seem to have this power-trip type thing going. Who'd have thought, right?

Firearms are prohibited "on campus", and they seem to think public roads bisecting campus ARE Purdue University property, thus subject to their jurisdiction and Purdue regulations as well as state laws.

They are incorrect,to be sure. To date this fact has not deterred them.

It's going to take a lawsuit.

 

[VERT]

Washington v State, 2010.

Son's 4th Amendment rights were violated. Consult an attorney.

I am not a big "my rights were violated" type of person. But if this was what happened then I agree the officer was in the wrong. I am all for officer safety, but simply removing the occupant from the vehicle would have allowed for that. Also there was no reason to believe that a person with an LTCH or even one that has a gun poses a threat. The most dangerous activity in that exchange has officer butter finger handling an unfamiliar weapon in public.

While I agree the officer was in the wrong a lawsuit will not go anywhere. There are no "damages" and what attorney is going to work for free. I don't have the money to throw at an inconvenience such as this and neither do most other people. SO the result is individual officers can pretty much do whatever there leadership will allow them to do. (I bet that will make some people mad!)

Maybe we need to start a fund somewhere to pursue a good lawsuit.

 

[Destro]

Forget talking to anyone. Lawyer up, immediately. LTCH is not grounds for search. Upon presenting it, all questioning regarding the firearm must cease.

negative ghostrider....that case does not extend to all circumstances

 

[Destro]

If the Officer can articulate his reasoning, he's probably good to go. There could be 10 bazillion different things he could articulate.

As in Malone, we conclude that in the absence of an articulable basis that either there was a legitimate concern for officer safety or a belief that a crime had been or was being committed, the search of Washington’s car for a handgun was not justified.

 

[Hornett]

When you are ordered out of your car by an officer, lock your doors behind you.

 

[Turfweazel]

When you are ordered out of your car by an officer, lock your doors behind you.

I understand this and will try to if the situation ever happens to me but my windows are power windows. I doubt the LEO will let me turn the key put my window up and then get out. How do you propose to do this?

 

[IndyGunSafety]

Washington v State, 2010.

Son's 4th Amendment rights were violated. Consult an attorney.

This ^^^^ Read the case here on our website: Legal

Washington v. State of Indiana

 

[lonehoosier]

I understand this and will try to if the situation ever happens to me but my windows are power windows. I doubt the LEO will let me turn the key put my window up and then get out. How do you propose to do this?

Why do yo shut your car off? Why do you roll your window down all the way? Were you ask to do that?

I will answer my own questions. I never shut my car off. I don't even put my car in park I leave it in drive. I only roll down my window enough to put my hand out. If he asks me to step out, window goes up, car gets put in park, shut off car, keys in pocket and lock the doors on the way out.

 

[Hornett]

I understand this and will try to if the situation ever happens to me but my windows are power windows. I doubt the LEO will let me turn the key put my window up and then get out. How do you propose to do this?

I know it will be difficult, but just stay cool, say "OK officer", turn on the ignition (without starring the car, obviously), roll up the windows, and get out.

 

[stephen87]

When you get stopped, put it in park and leave it running. It's what I do.

Destro, without RAS that a crime has been/is going to be/or is happening, a valid LTCH is supposed to be the end of all questionijg regarding the handgun is to cease. ISC ruled that. Also, Washington states that once an occupant is removed from the handgun, ie taken out of the car where the handgun sits, officer safety can no longer be articulated. Therefore, once a person is removed from the handgun, officers cannot articulate a reason for taking a firearm.

 

[g00n24]

Yep pretty much what everyone else has said. Washington applies here, if he kept asking about the gun then Indiana v Richardson may apply some. Perhaps you can get some tuition assistance for your son from the nice people at the Purdue Police dept. (assuming your son is a student there)..

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Yep pretty much what everyone else has said. Washington applies here, if he kept asking about the gun then Indiana v Richardson may apply some. Perhaps you can get some tuition assistance for your son from the nice people at the Purdue Police dept. (assuming your son is a student there)..

Indiana vs Richardson is specific to seatbelt stops. Seatbelt stops are their own area of law because of the following IC code:

IC 9-19-10-3.1
...However, a vehicle, the contents of a vehicle, the driver of a vehicle, or a passenger in a vehicle may not be inspected, searched, or detained solely because of a violation of this chapter...

OP was stopped for speeding.