Westfield PD disarms me during traffic stop

[88E30M50]

What would he have done if you had been pocket carrying I wonder? I don't know about you, but I'd really be uncomfortable having anyone reach into my pocket fishing for a pistol. Not only would there be a feeling of being violated through an unwarranted search, but if he managed to pop a round off while pulling it from my pocket, it's my femoral artery that the thing is pointed towards (not to mention other parts which I'd prefer to remain intact).

 

[SEIndSAM]

Seeing how I live in Westfield I don't see any good coming from filing a complaint long term. I was honest with him in hopes of it earning me a "warning" rather than a ticket. Well, I still got the $180 ticket. I'm not cop bashing and I'm not looking for anyone else to do so. However, he never asked to disarm me as I thought he was asking me to get out of the vehicle to have visual while he went to his car and wrote a ticket, seems that could come close to illegal search and seizure? Maybe I'm reading to far into it and I should just move along and pay the ticket.

Nobody is saying not to pay the ticket. The illegal search is a different matter and a complaint should be made. What's to stop the Officer from shooting someone trying to unload an unfamilar handgun next time??? The safest place is in your holster. DON'T HANDLE THE GUN!!!!

 

[Bunnykid68]

So, being licensed to carry, there is no crime. Correct?

I dont think that matters. If you get pulled over for an infraction, the officer asking about weapons is just idle chatting, not an active investigation into a crime.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Seeing how I live in Westfield I don't see any good coming from filing a complaint long term. I was honest with him in hopes of it earning me a "warning" rather than a ticket. Well, I still got the $180 ticket. I'm not cop bashing and I'm not looking for anyone else to do so. However, he never asked to disarm me as I thought he was asking me to get out of the vehicle to have visual while he went to his car and wrote a ticket, seems that could come close to illegal search and seizure? Maybe I'm reading to far into it and I should just move along and pay the ticket.

It is illegal search and seizure

 

[SteveM4A1]

Problem is it's more than likely not a good time to have a educational session with an officer. It just tends to tick them off more! I guess it is just best to just say nothing in vehicle illegal and then make complaint afterward if necessary.

It isn't that difficult to inform him of case law before he goes about violating my personal space.

 

[jumpjet]

I've only been on this site for a month or so, but feel like I've spent most of that month reading about these illegal seizures. That's what we are talking about when an officer does not have a reasonable articulable suspicion that a crime has been or is about to be committed. (Speeding is not a criminal activity either.) There are various threads on this, providing many hours of reading if you'd like. If the officer cannot articulate why it is necessary for him to seize your firearm, it is illegal for him to do it. "For his safety" is not a valid reason to take your property if you have done nothing to indicate you are likely to use your property for some dangerous reason.

If he takes your gun, why stop there? You could jab him in the eye with a pen and cause permanent disability in less time than it takes to unholster. Maybe they should take our pens too, just to be safe.

 

[88GT]

IANAL .. From what I understand; It is proper to answer "yes" when asked and also to provide license upon asked, but I'm not 100% on the legality of asking unless there is a clear reason. Indiana is not a "Must inform" state, but if asked, then yes. Perhaps he had it on his mind and is being extra careful. Although I agree, if you were a threat.... 1) you'd answer "no" and they cant search unless given reason or permission, and/ or 2) he would have been shot before he had a chance to ask that question, which would answer his question in a rather loud way.

Seems like when you look at those two options for being a threat...well its a redundant and pointless question.

It's also insanely stupid when you consider some of us carry TWO.

On a side note I feel that every police officers job duty #1, priority numero uno, is To get home safe.

He should find a different job. That particular priority is in direct conflict with much of his obligatory job description.

Although easily seen as an answer in and of itself, Would it be a bad idea at this point to just ask in a shocked kind of tone " What does that have to do with my speed?!"

You've created a false dichotomy. When asked if you have any weapons, and assuming you do, your options are not limited to truthful or deceitful. You can simply state that you have nothing illegal in the vehicle. Or, as some prefer, don't say anything while blowing him kisses.

Seeing how I live in Westfield I don't see any good coming from filing a complaint long term. I was honest with him in hopes of it earning me a "warning" rather than a ticket. Well, I still got the $180 ticket. I'm not cop bashing and I'm not looking for anyone else to do so. However, he never asked to disarm me as I thought he was asking me to get out of the vehicle to have visual while he went to his car and wrote a ticket, seems that could come close to illegal search and seizure? Maybe I'm reading to far into it and I should just move along and pay the ticket.

That sounds an awful lot like you're more concerned with your personal comfort than your personal liberty. Do I read you right?

 

[shibumiseeker]

It's also insanely stupid when you consider some of us carry TWO.

Or more.

 

[88GT]

Or more.

Show-off.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Yeah, the officer can't do that. File a complaint. The second he sees a LTCH he should write you your speeding ticket and send you on the way.

There's no case law to support your stance. Granted I don't believe it's a good thing to universally disarm people, but there's nothing illegal about if a person is stopped for a legal reason.

As far as complaints, nothing wrong with it, just know, most administrations see absolutely nothing wrong with disarming a motorist that is legally stopped. In other words, a written complaint will probably go nowhere. People need to get off their butts and march
To their respective PDs, show their face to the chief, and express their displeasure.

 

[88GT]

There's no case law to support your stance. Granted I don't believe it's a good thing to universally disarm people, but there's nothing illegal about if a person is stopped for a legal reason.

As far as complaints, nothing wrong with it, just know, most administrations see absolutely nothing wrong with disarming a motorist that is legally stopped. In other words, a written complaint will probably go nowhere. People need to get off their butts and march
To their respective PDs, show their face to the chief, and express their displeasure.

You sure 'bout that?

 

[Mark 1911]

I had a very similar experience in Hammond a few weeks ago which I posted about here: https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/general-firearms-discussion/330485-pulled-over.html . The only difference in my case is that my handgun was in a case in the door pocket as opposed to carried in a holster on my person. I didn't file a complaint, but in your case I might be more inclined to do so. I think the officer was more intrusive in your case than in mine.

I understand the concerns about living there. In my case, I commute through the town where I was stopped every day to and from work.

 

[Kutnupe14]

You sure 'bout that?

Disarming a person during a traffic stop? I could be wrong, but I've never seen the case. Feel free to prove otherwise, if you have the info.

 

[Trigger Time]

File a complaint so that it corrects his behavior and no fellow gun owners have their rights violated.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Disarming a person during a traffic stop? I could be wrong, but I've never seen the case. Feel free to prove otherwise, if you have the info.

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03200808jsk.pdf

I think this would apply to anyone anywhere

 

[Kutnupe14]

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03200808jsk.pdf

I think this would apply to anyone anywhere

Nope, doesn't apply to traffic stops. Pennsylvania v Mimms sets the tone.

 

[KG1]

One should never give up their rights to an illegal search and or seizure in the hopes it will get you out of a ticket. YMMV. "Officer I have nothing illegal on my person or in my vehicle. I do not consent to any searches or seizures"

 

[Meyer]

I hate to say this, but I would pass on a complaint. Pretty small world up here.

 

[88GT]

Nope, doesn't apply to traffic stops. Pennsylvania v Mimms sets the tone.

Traffic stop doesn't have much to do with it. It's the presence of the LTCH that should stop all further inquiries/actions regarding the firearm. I do believe that the standard holds whether one is stopped in his vehicle or on the street.

Found it: Washington v State, 2010. Presentation of LTCH immediately limits grounds for fishing expedition by LE (regarding the firearm), as well as the bounds of "officer safety" claims used to justify said firearm's seizure.

 

[KG1]

I also believe that the Officer needs to show RAS that the person is believed to be "armed AND dangerous" for the seizure of the firearm to be justifiable.