Interesting conversation with a LEO tonight

[Guest canynracer]

I don't think that has been the argument. Rabbi said if asked he would show a LEO his permit, just that he wouldn't volunteer it up front. I do not think you can legally just be quite when it comes to answering/showin your HCP. The law clearly says it must be shown upon demand of a LEO.

ACTUALLY

We have this thing called "the law" in this country. I am obligated to obey it. So are you. The law calls for me to present my permit on request. That's it.

As for asking me, I never said I would answer no. I said I would not answer at all. I am under no obligation to answer that question. Nor am I under obligation to answer where I am going, why I am in a particular neighborhood, or why I have 5 unloaded long guns in my back seat. It's legal. It's none of anyone's business.

As for complaints, I have yet to see the department that didnt take citizen complaints seriously and investigate them.

As for great cops and stupid permit holders, there is no question. The vast majority of cops are decent guys doing their jobs. But all too often there is some guy out there who feels like the citizenry needs to feel the weight of his badge every now and then, and he likes inflicting his power on people he can. And that's what I object to.

[molonlabetn]

I don't see a significant difference between asking me if I have a gun and asking me if I have a permit... I wouldn't treat the question differently based on the wording, and I don't believe that any reasonable person would, either.

If I've got an unloaded rifle in the vehicle, and for some reason I'm not carrying, the permit wouldn't be relevant, and so I wouldn't show it (what would be the point?). So then the correct answer to the question is "I don't have anything illegal in my vehicle. Am I free to go?".

[Guest kwikrnu]

Rabbi is correct. You do not have to tell them you have a permit. Just hand it over.

[Guest kwikrnu]

I don't see a significant difference between asking me if I have a gun and asking me if I have a permit...

There is a difference.

[towerclimber37]

Does a patrol officer have to comply with this request?

as far as I know, yes he does. I may be wrong, but if he doesn't want a second more experience officer there both as a courtesy to myself and as a backup for HIM, then something fishy is going on.

[Guest ColdEspresso]

if my simple gesture of telling a cop can make a situation easier I am going to do it. From what I read, most of the time it seems you get let go with a warning.

This has happened to me on 3 separate occasions. Having an HCP an being polite has taken taken the focus off of the violation and put an emphasis on what is often a common interest (firearms). As long as I have been courteous and respectful (as I would expect someone to be when I am doing my job)there should be no problem. Relinquishing rights is another issue.

[Guest TNDixieGirl]

Oh BS!!! If I decide to let an LEO search my car, no frickin' big deal. I gave up no rights. I made a choice. If I hand an LEO my permit with my license, who the heck cares? I gave up no rights. I made a choice. If he asks me what color panties I have on and I tell him, I gave up no rights. I made a choice. You guys go to extremes to prove you have rights sometime.

Wearing an HCP badge is legal too, just like being uncooperative or refusing to answer questions or never showing your permit unless it's requested, but it doesn't mean it's the smartest thing to do.

Being an a**hole is legal too, but choosing to be an a**hole to a cop just because that's your right, is just asking for trouble. Being a jerk to a waitress is legal too, but it can also get funky things done to your food.

So go ahead, be an a** to a cop just cause it's legal. But don't bit*h when you get a 30 minute delay because you just had to prove you have rights.

Edited May 7, 2008 by TNDixieGirl

[towerclimber37]

I don't see a significant difference between asking me if I have a gun and asking me if I have a permit... I wouldn't treat the question differently based on the wording, and I don't believe that any reasonable person would, either.

If I've got an unloaded rifle in the vehicle, and for some reason I'm not carrying, the permit wouldn't be relevant, and so I wouldn't show it (what would be the point?). So then the correct answer to the question is "I don't have anything illegal in my vehicle. Am I free to go?".

exactly!!!

My florida CCW expired earlier this year. I now don't have a carry permit in any state, until I get time to go up to knoxville and get mike's class (that will be about a week from now.)

I now carry my pistols unloaded in my carry case. I have no worries, my pistol box looks like an old 35mm projector case. My RIFLE case on the other hand, looks just like a rifle case. I don't want some schmoe handling a 900.00 rifle as if it were a stick. after all, if he scratched it, I have to fix it. (no I'm not going to sue him or his department).

on the other hand, if he turns out to be friendly, and a firearm enthusiast, I would let him shoot it one weekend if he goes to the same range I do, or invites ME to his range!

but he won't get permission to search my vehicle in any case.

[molonlabetn]

There is a difference.

Well of course there is, but is it a significant difference?

It doesn't take much deduction to understand the intent of the question, if I have a gun which requires a permit, I'll show the permit. If I have a gun which does not require a permit, it is not relevant. There is no law which requires us to declare our weapons... only our permit.

[Fallguy]

Oh BS!!! If I decide to let an LEO search my car, no frickin' big deal. I gave up no rights. I made a choice. If I hand an LEO my permit with my license, who the heck cares? I gave up no rights. I made a choice. If he asks me what color panties I have on and I tell him, I gave up no rights. I made a choice. You guys go to extremes to prove you have rights sometime.

Actually if you let them search your car without them having probably cause or a warrant...yes, you've made a choice....you have chosen to give up your right to be secure in your person and possessions. Rights just seem to mean more to some than others. Also it is the law, how are we supposed to have confidence in those that enforce the laws if they feel they doesn't apply to them. If a person on the street asked you what color panties you had on, would you tell them? If not, why? They would have just about as much need to know as the LEO.

I don't see why not letting someone run all over you is being an a$$hole, just because the other person is a LEO.

I have never advocating being a trouble maker, just not going letting them make trouble for me either.

Edited May 7, 2008 by Fallguy

[Guest TNDixieGirl]

I have to ask, what does this mean?

Also it is the law, how are we supposed to have confidence in those that enforce the laws if they feel they don't apply to them.

There's no law that say I have to choose to exercise the right to refuse a search of my vehicle. If I don't care if they search, so what. I still have rights to be secure. I didn't lose them simply because I let them search the car. When I drive off, I still have that right.

Edited May 7, 2008 by TNDixieGirl

[towerclimber37]

I agree fallguy.

the significant thing that Dixiegirl doesn't realize is that a police officer is there to ENFORCE the law. this means that he will do so even if you're ignorant of it.

if you allow an officer to search your car, you give up your right.

if that officer happens to find a seatbelt that doesn't work, he WILL cite you for it. he has to. he's not a peace officer who wants to make sure you're not a harm to society he's a POLICE officer that will enforce all laws within his ken. no matter if you're a law abiding citizen or not. he has no choice. it's his job and he will perform it, regardless of what he thinks of you personally.

the seatbelt thing is just an example. if he finds something else that requires he take you to jail, thereby ruining your life, he'll do that too. after all, HE will go home to HIS family at the end of the day...you on the other hand, won't. and he could care less about the devastation wrought on you or your family by that one act of YOU giving up YOUR right.

[Fallguy]

I have to ask, what does this mean?

Also it is the law, how are we supposed to have confidence in those that enforce the laws if they feel they don't apply to them.

It means if LEOs feel the laws of the land do not apply to them, that they can do whatever they want and citizens must comply. How are we expected to believe they are doing their job properly.

[molonlabetn]

...So go ahead, be an a** to a cop just cause it's legal. But don't bit*h when you get a 30 minute delay because you just had to prove you have rights.

Actually, in point of fact it would be the cop who was causing the delay just to prove that he/she has authority. I just want to be on my way without being forced to discuss my personal life... hence the decision to not volunteer said personal information.

I'd prefer to leave opinion and individual perception out of the equation and only do what I am required to. But, as you say, it's your decision if to retain privacy or not. Just don't suggest that desiring my privacy is unacceptable or unreasonable.

[Fallguy]

But, as you say, it's your decision if to retain privacy or not. Just don't suggest that desiring my privacy is unacceptable or unreasonable.

+1000

[Guest kwikrnu]

I agree fallguy.

the significant thing that Dixiegirl doesn't realize is that a police officer is there to ENFORCE the law. this means that he will do so even if you're ignorant of it.

if you allow an officer to search your car, you give up your right.

if that officer happens to find a seatbelt that doesn't work, he WILL cite you for it. he has to. he's not a peace officer who wants to make sure you're not a harm to society he's a POLICE officer that will enforce all laws within his ken. no matter if you're a law abiding citizen or not. he has no choice. it's his job and he will perform it, regardless of what he thinks of you personally.

the seatbelt thing is just an example. if he finds something else that requires he take you to jail, thereby ruining your life, he'll do that too. after all, HE will go home to HIS family at the end of the day...you on the other hand, won't. and he could care less about the devastation wrought on you or your family by that one act of YOU giving up YOUR right.

Yep.

Cops will sometimes enforce laws that do not exist because they are ignorant. They can lie to you also. Forget all about we're here to protect and serve crap. They are not there to help you nor protect you.

[Guest TNDixieGirl]

And this again, is where I believe you guys go to extremes to prove your points.

Do you think for one minute that I, personally, would let a person search my car if I had anything in it that would remotely suggest I'll go to jail. Of course not. And most, if not all, of you wouldn't either. So whats the huge deal? Do ya'll make it a habit to carry illegal things in your car that would cause you to be arrested? Of course you don't. Just another extreme example.

Yes, cops do have the choice in the matter. If my seatbelt latch is busted, he can absolutely choose to warn me to have that fixed. Just like he can warn me to stop longer at that stop sign I rolled through. Or, he can ticket me for both. Cops makes those choices everyday at every stop. Just cause he stopped you for speeding doesn't mean he'll give you a ticket.

It means if LEOs feel the laws of the land do not apply to them, that they can do whatever they want and citizens must comply. How are we expected to believe they are doing their job properly.

Sorry Fall, I still don't see where that fit into what I was saying. I never drew out a scenario where the cop acted like laws didn't apply to him. And I never said citizens must comply. I just said if you do comply, you aren't losing your rights. You have the right to let them search or not, your choice. And I'm not even saying I'd consent to a search. Ever. I'm just saying no one is trampling my rights by asking to search. Or asking where I've been, etc.

Edited May 7, 2008 by TNDixieGirl

[Guest TNDixieGirl]

Yep.

Cops will sometimes enforce laws that do not exist because they are ignorant. They can lie to you also. Forget all about we're here to protect and serve crap. They are not there to help you nor protect you.

Yeah, you just remember that the next time you call 911.

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

Oh BS!!! If I decide to let an LEO search my car, no frickin' big deal. I gave up no rights. I made a choice. If I hand an LEO my permit with my license, who the heck cares? I gave up no rights. I made a choice. If he asks me what color panties I have on and I tell him, I gave up no rights. I made a choice. You guys go to extremes to prove you have rights sometime.

Wearing an HCP badge is legal too, just like being uncooperative or refusing to answer questions or never showing your permit unless it's requested, but it doesn't mean it's the smartest thing to do.

Being an a**hole is legal too, but choosing to be an a**hole to a cop just because that's your right, is just asking for trouble. Being a jerk to a waitress is legal too, but it can also get funky things done to your food.

So go ahead, be an a** to a cop just cause it's legal. But don't bit*h when you get a 30 minute delay because you just had to prove you have rights.

TNDixieGirl so what color panties do you have on J/K

[Guest TNDixieGirl]

LOL...red! And you sir have just trampled all over my rights!!

[Punisher84]

To go back about 3 pages, Towerclimber, I wasn't clear and I apologize I don't mean ANY gun. I'm talking about a scenario like this:

Officer: Sir can I see your license and registration?

Civilian: Yessir. (hands it over.)

Officer: Thank you sir. Know why I pulled you over?

Civilian: No sir. *shifts in the seat and exposes gun*

Officer: Sir keep your hands where I can see them and step out of the vehicle...

That kind of scenario. Something simple to avoid by being upfront about it. Just because you don't have to by law doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

I agree with alot that's been said, but there are statements that are speckled with LEO distrust, fear, and I dare say hatred. I'm not counting Voldemort's statements because well he's Voldemort, but Fallguy, Rabbi, etc. you make such a big deal about rights and all the rest, but I don't see either of you putting your neck out for what's right either. Fallguy you used to be a reserve officer right? You can understand the nervousness that you get walking up to a car with back-up 5 minutes away if there's trouble. I'm not talking about searching, no-knock warrants, or anything other than give me a good excuse why showing a LEO your permit with your DL and insurance card is a bad idea.

This is a simple discussion that has been blown out of proportion and taken to extremes. Regardless of what Rabbi apparently thinks, not all cops are jack-booted stormtroopers hell bent on the destruction of your individual freedoms and rights. That's congress' job. Relax people. Fight the guys in the shadows, not the boys in blue.

[Guest TNDixieGirl]

To go back about 3 pages, Towerclimber, I wasn't clear and I apologize I don't mean ANY gun. I'm talking about a scenario like this:

Officer: Sir can I see your license and registration?

Civilian: Yessir. (hands it over.)

Officer: Thank you sir. Know why I pulled you over?

Civilian: No sir. *shifts in the seat and exposes gun*

Officer: Sir keep your hands where I can see them and step out of the vehicle...

That kind of scenario. Something simple to avoid by being upfront about it. Just because you don't have to by law doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

I agree with alot that's been said, but there are statements that are speckled with LEO distrust, fear, and I dare say hatred. I'm not counting Voldemort's statements because well he's Voldemort, but Fallguy, Rabbi, etc. you make such a big deal about rights and all the rest, but I don't see either of you putting your neck out for what's right either. Fallguy you used to be a reserve officer right? You can understand the nervousness that you get walking up to a car with back-up 5 minutes away if there's trouble. I'm not talking about searching, no-knock warrants, or anything other than give me a good excuse why showing a LEO your permit with your DL and insurance card is a bad idea.

This is a simple discussion that has been blown out of proportion and taken to extremes. Regardless of what Rabbi apparently thinks, not all cops are jack-booted stormtroopers hell bent on the destruction of your individual freedoms and rights. That's congress' job. Relax people. Fight the guys in the shadows, not the boys in blue.

Exactly what I was trying to get across, but did so rather ineloquently. For any I offended, I apologize.

[towerclimber37]

Yeah, you just remember that the next time you call 911.

exactly!!!

I will call 911 AFTER the S has HTF. I'll be on the phone to my lawyer THEN 911, wondering how I'm going to get this stain out of my carpet.

I will NOT look to them for protection. just to fill out the forms for the judge and jury.

[molonlabetn]

The type of LEO who would cause an issue over seeing a holstered firearm would be just as likely to cause the same issue in reaction to simply being told that there was one... I hear alot more stories resulting from the latter than the former, because pre-empting the officer's question about weapons doesn't consistently work, if the officer has an agenda to begin with (such as find a reason to take you to jail, which is undeniably their objective... else they wouldn't be confronting you).

[towerclimber37]

To go back about 3 pages, Towerclimber, I wasn't clear and I apologize I don't mean ANY gun. I'm talking about a scenario like this:

Officer: Sir can I see your license and registration?

Civilian: Yessir. (hands it over.)

Officer: Thank you sir. Know why I pulled you over?

Civilian: No sir. *shifts in the seat and exposes gun*

Officer: Sir keep your hands where I can see them and step out of the vehicle...

That kind of scenario. Something simple to avoid by being upfront about it. Just because you don't have to by law doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

I agree with alot that's been said, but there are statements that are speckled with LEO distrust, fear, and I dare say hatred. I'm not counting Voldemort's statements because well he's Voldemort, but Fallguy, Rabbi, etc. you make such a big deal about rights and all the rest, but I don't see either of you putting your neck out for what's right either. Fallguy you used to be a reserve officer right? You can understand the nervousness that you get walking up to a car with back-up 5 minutes away if there's trouble. I'm not talking about searching, no-knock warrants, or anything other than give me a good excuse why showing a LEO your permit with your DL and insurance card is a bad idea.

This is a simple discussion that has been blown out of proportion and taken to extremes. Regardless of what Rabbi apparently thinks, not all cops are jack-booted stormtroopers hell bent on the destruction of your individual freedoms and rights. That's congress' job. Relax people. Fight the guys in the shadows, not the boys in blue.

No worries. I must be jaded. I don't believe that possession of a firearm should be grounds for incarceration. I don't get nervous when I see a stranger with a firearm on his person. now, if he were to point it at me in a menacing way, I'd become quite reactive, quick fast and in a hurry and I guess we'd start cutting heads right then. I don't care if he has a badge, a uniform or a fecking marching band to cheer him on. otherwise, I'm pretty ambivalent about it.

Your scenario would be cause to make a fella like you nervous though punisher. I agree with ya..and you're not stepping on my toes. I just don't believe that possession of a firearm automatically makes a person a danger to others.