Traffic Stop

[Dad]

I was pulled over for having tint on my front side windows in a pickup. I got a warning and deserved it. My tint is 15%, supposed to be 30%.

When the officer came back to give me my license, registration and warning, he asked me: "I see you have a handgun permit. Are you carrying?" I wasn't, said so and he asked nothing more.

I had my permit in my wallet and he may have seen the pink card in my wallet, I'm not sure. What I'm wondering is if the information popped up on his laptop when he ran my plate? Ultimately, I'm wondering if I should expect to be treated differently during any encounters w/ LEO's because I have a permit to carry?

 

[mtgasten]

In short, Yes your LICENSE to carry a handgun shows up in the computer system when your information is run, it is also likely that he saw the pink permission slip in your wallet! and in regards to being treated differently, it just all depends really, some officers will hassle you about it, others don't even care, just always be ready to stand up for yourself and your rights. On another note Welcome to Ingo!

 

[Dad]

Thank you for the welcome. Been lurking for awhile.

If I had been carrying, and I frequently am, the gun would have been stuck between the seat and console in my pickup. Should I have informed him if I was carrying? If so, how? I was thinking, put my hands on the steering wheel and tell him where the gun was and ask for instructions.

 

[Rookie]

Indiana does NOT require you to inform.

 

[Hoosierdood]

Officer: Here's your license, registration and a warning. By the way, I see that you have a License to Carry Handgun. Do you have a handgun in your vehicle?

You: There is nothing illegal in my vehicle officer. Am I free to go?


ETA: If he pushes the issue, just keep repeating "Why am I being detained? Am I free to go?" Never surrender your firearm. If the officer orders you out of the vehicle and confiscates the firearm on his own, there is not a whole lot you can do about it. But NEVER willingly hand over your gun to anyone. Even when the officer says "I'm going to need you to hand over your firearm." Simply state that you would rather not do that but if he wanted to take it, you would not resist.

 

[Hammerhead]

You don't have to answer anything, whether armed or not. If you are armed, you can say "I have nothing illegal in my vehicle." You can also just answer with "Will that be all officer?" or "Am I free to go?" You can also just remain silent and wait for him to lose interest.

You can also reply that you are, in fact, legally carrying your sidearm. Should he persist in asking questions of an official nature (something other than a friendly "What do you carry? Do you like it?" etc. He may be a gun guy too.) you can simply stick with "Am I free to go?" You do not have to respond any other way, you do not have to answer any other questions, and you do not have to allow him to coonfinger your sidearm and "run the numbers" or disarm you.

Should the officer start down that path, don't give up your rights, but DO NOT RESIST. After he knows you have a legally valid LTCH, all questions should cease, and he has no legal leg to stand on to disarm you and perform an illegal search. Remember the phrase "I do not consent to any search of my person or my property, officer."

Keeping your hands visible is always a good idea, but you do not have to inform, and you certainly don't have to "wait for instructions" or consent to searches. Don't be confrontational, but be polite and firm with your "No."

Welcome to INGO.

 

[jedi]

Thank you for the welcome. Been lurking for awhile.

If I had been carrying, and I frequently am, the gun would have been stuck between the seat and console in my pickup. Should I have informed him if I was carrying? If so, how? I was thinking, put my hands on the steering wheel and tell him where the gun was and ask for instructions.

If you do a search here on INGO you will see both extremes of what happens when you inform.

Some INGO members have been had the LEO pull a gun on them, forced them out of the car, handcuffed, weapon taken, unloaded, serial # run, etc. Other INGO members have had a nice experience with the LEO who never disarmed them, ask them what they carry and then hold a long conversation on "is that a good gun, I've been meaning to get xyz instead, etc.."

It depends on a lot of variables but as Rookie stated you are NOT legally required to inform the police you have a weapon.

-Jedi

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

Should I have informed him if I was carrying?

Indiana does NOT require you to inform.

It all depends, OP...

It's indeed true that there is no legal requirement in Indiana (a FEW other states mandate notification).

But, in my opinion, it's a case-by-case basis.

If I had my gun on my holster covered by a shirt or two and a jacket...I'd probably not disclose.

If I had my gun in a dashboard / console mounted holster...I might disclose depending on visibility. If it were in a clam shell console box and I didn't have to access that box to get the vehicle registration, I probably wouldn't disclose.

If the gun is on my person and, for whatever reason, I'm asked/ordered out of the vehicle...you bet I'll disclose.

Also FYI: Not all LEO realize that there's not a legal requirement for notification. Some think there IS a requirement to notify. Some LEO also think that there's some kind of requirement for them to take your gun/s back to their commission for a "stolen gun check".

Bit of advice for you, though: The less your gun is coonfingered, the better off everyone will be from a safety standpoint. I suggest that you leave your gun in your holster on your person while you're in your vehicle rather than removing it from said holster every time you're in and out. You'll GREATLY reduce your chance for a negligent discharge this way. If your excuse is that it's too uncomfortable to drive that way, then I suggest that you might want to look into other on-body carry locations and/or choice of hardware (belt, holster, and gun combination). Seriously, though, leave your gun in your holster until such a time as you need it.

-J-

 

[Scutter01]

So AFTER the stop was complete and AFTER he already knew you could legally carry a handgun, that's when he went fishing for...what, exactly?

 

[Sarrsipius]

Officer: Here's your license, registration and a warning. By the way, I see that you have a License to Carry Handgun. Do you have a handgun in your vehicle?

You: There is nothing illegal in my vehicle officer. Am I free to go?


ETA: If he pushes the issue, just keep repeating "Why am I being detained? Am I free to go?" Never surrender your firearm. If the officer orders you out of the vehicle and confiscates the firearm on his own, there is not a whole lot you can do about it. But NEVER willingly hand over your gun to anyone. Even when the officer says "I'm going to need you to hand over your firearm." Simply state that you would rather not do that but if he wanted to take it, you would not resist.

It would seem to me that by dodging his question in the first place you are inviting a pissing match. You are sort of daring the cop to try and show you "who's boss". Doesn't mean he's right but I think you'd be less likely to end up being "detained" if you simply answered his yes or no question with a yes or no answer. Of course, there are those that love to engage in that sort of thing so I guess it just depends on how much drama you want in your life.

 

[jsharmon7]

So AFTER the stop was complete and AFTER he already knew you could legally carry a handgun, that's when he went fishing for...what, exactly?

Maybe to show support for a citizen carrying a firearm legally? Sounds like something I'd say in passing. Maybe not though...

 

[goinggreyfast]

It would seem to me that by dodging his question in the first place you are inviting a pissing match. You are sort of daring the cop to try and show you "who's boss". Doesn't mean he's right but I think you'd be less likely to end up being "detained" if you simply answered his yes or no question with a yes or no answer. Of course, there are those that love to engage in that sort of thing so I guess it just depends on how much drama you want in your life.

Uhhhh....no. Polite and respectful is not confrontational. Mr/Ms LEO more than likely has heard the above-mentioned response before.

 

[Scutter01]

Maybe to show support for a citizen carrying a firearm legally? Sounds like something I'd say in passing. Maybe not though...

The officer deserves the benefit of the doubt that it was conversational and not investigative, but I'll still remain skeptical.

 

[mtgasten]

It would seem to me that by dodging his question in the first place you are inviting a pissing match. You are sort of daring the cop to try and show you "who's boss". Doesn't mean he's right but I think you'd be less likely to end up being "detained" if you simply answered his yes or no question with a yes or no answer. Of course, there are those that love to engage in that sort of thing so I guess it just depends on how much drama you want in your life.

 

[Sarrsipius]

Uhhhh....no. Polite and respectful is not confrontational. Mr/Ms LEO more than likely has heard the above-mentioned response before.

Some over zealous LEO's may see passive aggressive as confrontational. Wrong as they may be, it still may only serve to escalate the situation. It's a personal choice and you would be in the right to take either approach. You have to be the one to decide what is appropriate for you in that situation. Just something to consider I guess.

 

[Hoosierdood]

It would seem to me that by dodging his question in the first place you are inviting a pissing match. You are sort of daring the cop to try and show you "who's boss". Doesn't mean he's right but I think you'd be less likely to end up being "detained" if you simply answered his yes or no question with a yes or no answer. Of course, there are those that love to engage in that sort of thing so I guess it just depends on how much drama you want in your life.

You have this all wrong. It is not polite or disrespectful. If a complete stranger came up to me and asked me if I had 20 bucks in my wallet, would it be rude to tell them that it was none of their business?

Any good cop would know exactly what you are saying and leave it at that. They would not get into an argument. And if they do decide to "show me who's boss" and end up violating my rights, my voice recorder will capture it all, and I will be heading straight to my lawyer.

You aren't being disrespectful by refusing to answer his questions. What if he asked what color your underwear were? It has nothing to do with the reason for the stop. By stating that you have nothing illegal, and asking if you are free to go, you are very simply asserting your rights. You don't have to be cocky or rude about it.

 

[Hoosierdood]

Some over zealous LEO's may see passive aggressive as confrontational. Wrong as they may be, it still may only serve to escalate the situation. It's a personal choice and you would be in the right to take either approach. You have to be the one to decide what is appropriate for you in that situation. Just something to consider I guess.

And its THOSE type of LEO's who need to be off the force. They have no right serving with the multitude of good and decent cops. It is an affront to all law enforcement to keep these guys on the force. Maybe if they try to violate my rights, I will be the one to expose their JBT ways and teach them a lesson. That might come in the form of an attitude adjustment (even cops have bad days), or if the violation is serious enough, getting a potential threat off the streets.


ETA: Read my sig line reference to jgreiner's comment. The only reason the over zealous cops remain over zealous is that nobody is taking a stand for their rights. As long as we keep cowering in fear, it will keep happening.

 

[Loganwildman]

I have been reading this and other threads with interest. So if there is no requirement to disclose or surrender your side arm, and the officer forces the issue, is there any recourse we have?

 

[Sarrsipius]

And its THOSE type of LEO's who need to be off the force. They have no right serving with the multitude of good and decent cops. It is an affront to all law enforcement to keep these guys on the force.

I agree 100%. Unfortunately they are out there and my point was only that one should be prepared to have to deal with their inapropriate reaction to your reponse if you DO assert your rights in that way. Maybe I was stating the obvious. And if you aren't in the mood to deal with them, perhaps a simple yes or no answer could get you on your way without the conflict. I'm not advocating one way or the other. Just food for thought.

 

[Hoosierdood]

I have been reading this and other threads with interest. So if there is no requirement to disclose or surrender your side arm, and the officer forces the issue, is there any recourse we have?

This is the reason why I carry a voice recorder. DO NOT RESIST the police even when you know they are blatantly violating your rights. You will not win on the side of the road. Assert your rights and leave it at that. If an officer violates your rights, take your recording along with a type written formal complaint to the officer's supervisor. Go up the chain of command.

If the officer continues after he knows that you have a valid LTCH, and he confiscates your firearm for no reason other than he is going to "show you who is boss", there is one thing that may work. Refuse to take possession of the firearm when he offers it back to you. The officer must keep the weapon and file an affidavit as to his reason to suspect that you were dangerous.

IC 35-47-14-3
Warrantless seizure of firearm from individual believed to be dangerous
Sec. 3. (a) If a law enforcement officer seizes a firearm from an individual whom the law enforcement officer believes to be dangerous without obtaining a warrant, the law enforcement officer shall submit to the circuit or superior court having jurisdiction over the individual believed to be dangerous a written statement under oath or affirmation describing the basis for the law enforcement officer's belief that the individual is dangerous.
(b) The court shall review the written statement submitted under subsection (a). If the court finds that probable cause exists to believe that the individual is dangerous, the court shall order the law enforcement agency having custody of the firearm to retain the firearm. If the court finds that there is no probable cause to believe that the individual is dangerous, the court shall order the law enforcement agency having custody of the firearm to return the firearm to the individual.
(c) This section does not authorize a law enforcement officer to perform a warrantless search or seizure if a warrant would otherwise be required.

For the sake of warrantless seizure of a firearm the officer MUST BELIEVE that you are a dangerous person. Dangerous person is defined as:

IC 35-47-14-1
"Dangerous"
Sec. 1. (a) For the purposes of this chapter, an individual is "dangerous" if:
(1) the individual presents an imminent risk of personal injury to the individual or to another individual; or
(2) the individual may present a risk of personal injury to the individual or to another individual in the future and the individual:
(A) has a mental illness (as defined in IC 12-7-2-130) that may be controlled by medication, and has not demonstrated a pattern of voluntarily and consistently taking the individual's medication while not under supervision; or
(B) is the subject of documented evidence that would give rise to a reasonable belief that the individual has a propensity for violent or emotionally unstable conduct.
(b) The fact that an individual has been released from a mental health facility or has a mental illness that is currently controlled by medication does not establish that the individual is dangerous for the purposes of this chapter.

If the officer cannot prove that you are a dangerous person, then he has no legal right to confiscate your firearm, especially after he knows that you have a valid LTCH. This is where a voice recorder comes in handy. It has the encounter recorded so that you can prove that you made no statements indicating that you were dangerous, you complied with the officer's requests pertaining to the traffic stop, and there was no reason for the officer to believe that you were a threat.