Informing a LEO that your carrying, at a traffic stop

[Guest canynracer]

+100

that was funny right there!!!

[Guest Todd@CIS]

Show me the statute in T.C.A that tells me I have to provide any information beyond necessary information to identify myself.

We have been through this in other threads and I have yet to see ANY statute telling me what information I am LEGALLY required to provide under Tennessee law.

I have yet to see ANY statute that tells me I am LEGALLY required to answer questions at a stop beyond providing necessary information to identify myself.

So please please please--show me the law, show me the legal requirement.

I don't want personal opinions, I don't want the LEO opinion that we have to answer every question they ask, I don't want your personal ideas--I want to see the LAW, STATUTE or CASELAW that requires me to answer every question I am given that does not automatically fall under the 5th Amendment right to not self-incriminate.

You didn't want "the LEO opinion," but here's mine.

As I understand, and use, the law, you are correct (legally and generally speaking).

Edited April 15, 2009 by Todd@CIS

[Guest justme]

You didn't want a LEO opinion, but here's mine.

As I understand, and use, the law, you are correct (legally and generally speaking).

never said I didn't want LEOs responding--what I didn't want was someone who does the position coming up and giving the stand by of "answer all questions regardless of whether it is germane to the stop or no" and who then simply can't show me the TN law that requires me to do so...

my point and everyone seems to keep missing it is: We are not living in a police state, and the people still have the right to refuse to answer questions if they so choose to. Law enforcement may not like it when we refuse--just like what happened in St. Louis when the TSA got mad because a man refused to answer their questions--and we all saw how they treated him...my question is WHY should we have to put up with that type of treatment?

Many people keep telling me that I've got to answer any question they ask--my point it--why? Why do I have to? What law tells me that I have to tell my life story just because they ask? There are some questions that they may ask that simply aren't their business, or are not germane to the reason for the stop...

There are questions I would answer depending on what was asked and why they wanted to know--but there are questions I would not answer...each situation is different and would have to be handled differently, but with professionalism and with decorum....

Edited April 15, 2009 by justme

[Guest justme]

You're missing the point...you may not HAVE to...per say.but, you can choose to be an ass, and they will choose to be a ass back. If they have the thought that you may be hiding something, all you did was prolong your ticket.

You're right, dont answer, but then dont complain when you are there for 30 min for a 5 min speeding ticket. Sometimes common sense needs to trump case law.

I'm not missing the point--I am trying to make the point that just because they ask--we don't have to answer. Several hold the opinion that we have to just answer every question that does not fall under the 5th amendment--I say show me the law that tells me I have to.

I'm seeing a lot of "answer all question" comments, from people who would be willing to just tell their life story if that is what was asked of them--but I'm not seeing any law that tells me I have a legal obligation to do so.

There is a difference between having a legal requirement to do so and having someone who walks up and just demands we comply and answer every inquiry without question--comply immediately to every question we ask type mentality...

[Guest Matchguy]

CanynRacer's advice is sound. Turning a traffic stop into a Constitutional Convention is never productive. Although the Constitution provides protection to the citizen against unreasonable arrest, search, and seizure, it also seeks to harmonize this with the need to give the police enough latitude to do their duty and catch lawbreakers, and that requires a certain level of civility and cooperation from the public that has long since been recognized by the courts. Whether or not this balance was achieved in any particular case will be established by the court AFTER the arrest has taken place, not on the shoulder of an Interstate Highway. The propriety of the officers questions can be the subject of an internal investigation, but it should be understood that this will also occur AFTER the arrest has taken place. Simply stated, if one is going to play this game, he had better know his stuff.

Edited April 16, 2009 by Matchguy

[DaveTN]

you're not required to answer questions, even at a traffic stop beyond providing identification, and there are limits on what information you are legally required to give.

Show me the statute in T.C.A that tells me I have to provide any information beyond necessary information to identify myself.

We have been through this in other threads and I have yet to see ANY statute telling me what information I am LEGALLY required to provide under Tennessee law.

I have yet to see ANY statute that tells me I am LEGALLY required to answer questions at a stop beyond providing necessary information to identify myself.

So please please please--show me the law, show me the legal requirement.

I don't want personal opinions, I don't want the LEO opinion that we have to answer every question they ask, I don't want your personal ideas--I want to see the LAW, STATUTE or CASELAW that requires me to answer every question I am given that does not automatically fall under the 5th Amendment right to not self-incriminate.

Good Grief…

If I give you an example of when you are required by law to answer the Officers question (other than your identity or drivers license), and it is a violation of Tennessee law if you refuse to speak, and has been upheld by the SCOTUS; will you STFU about no one being able to quote any law to you that says you have to answer an Officers questions?

[dralarms]

Good Grief…

If I give you an example of when you are required by law to answer the Officers question (other than your identity or drivers license), and it is a violation of Tennessee law if you refuse to speak, and has been upheld by the SCOTUS; will you STFU about no one being able to quote any law to you that says you have to answer an Officers questions?

Probally not.

[cadillacdude1975]

show me though. i want to see and read =)

[TNRobocop]

Great post!

Can I ask, is it good enough for you that I inform you by handing over my HCP with my DL, POI and registration without saying anything until you speak to me first? Then you ask me if I'm carrying and where, etc?

A couple of LEOs have told me that the 'lower heartrate' way to go on a stop...

Usually in my experience, both as a cop and as a person being armed that has been stopped by LE, the best way is all lights inside the car are on, hands on the steering wheel, no movements. When the officer asks for your DL, inform him that you have a carry permit. The officer will usually ask if you are armed/have it with you. Please do not quickly reach for it to show the officer. Keep your hands on the steering wheel and TELL the officer where.

Then follow the officers requests for the DL/POI/Registration slowly so the officer can watch that you are not reaching for the firearm. I never request to take the gun from the person. It is safer to just leave the damn thing where it is, especially if you have a HCP, chances are you are dealing with one of the good guys.

[strickj]

How about obstructing an investigation?

[Daniel]

...........Anything you say can and will be used against you ..........

[Guest LieutenantDan67]

Usually in my experience, both as a cop and as a person being armed that has been stopped by LE, the best way is all lights inside the car are on, hands on the steering wheel, no movements. When the officer asks for your DL, inform him that you have a carry permit. The officer will usually ask if you are armed/have it with you. Please do not quickly reach for it to show the officer. Keep your hands on the steering wheel and TELL the officer where.

Then follow the officers requests for the DL/POI/Registration slowly so the officer can watch that you are not reaching for the firearm. I never request to take the gun from the person. It is safer to just leave the damn thing where it is, especially if you have a HCP, chances are you are dealing with one of the good guys.

Thank you for your opinion/preference

I was just asking because I keep my DL/POI (and HCP when it comes) cards all together and can have them in my hand before I even come to a stop, so that I can have my hands on the wheel, window down, lights on when you approach my vehicle.

I just want to do whatever puts the officer at ease the most.

[Guest kdpate]

Good information to know if and when a person is carrying.....

[Guest justme]

How about obstructing an investigation?

and how is my refusal to answer certain questions obstructing anything?

under Tn. code annotated there is no requirement that we answer questions.

under Hiibell v sixth Judicial District it was ruled that a citizen can be required to provide their name during a Terry stop, and that providing such information does not in and of itself violate the 4th or 5th Amendment protections....Providing a name isn't the issue I have been trying to press here...it is the established fact that a person cannot be compelled to answer questions asked of them by a police officer during the normal course of contact.

For example--say I am driving and I am stopped at a Border Patrol "checkpoint"..I am not required by law to answer their question as to my nationality. I cannot, and neither can anyone else be compelled to answer questions other than those necessary to establish identification--UNLESS as I understand it, the law officer has RAS to believe that I have, am or am about to commit a crime AND I am in a state that has a "Stop and identify" statute such as Utah, Nevada or New Mexico...the state has to have a "stop and identify" statute on their books, and the police have to have RAS/PC to believe you are, are about to, or have already committed a crime in order to conduct a detainment that meets the legal requirements under Terry v Ohio...which driving up to a Border Patrol "checkpoint" and refusing to answer questions as to my whereabouts, my name, where I live and my nationality does not provide provide them...they may not like it--but there isn't a lot they can do about it unless they are interested in being sued out the nose...at least as I understand the laws I have read...of course all of this is just my opinion and I am sure Dave and a few others are going to disagree with me quite vehemently...

Now as for being detained in a Terry stop-- Justice J. White in a concurring opinion of Terry v Ohio said [emphasis in italics entirely mine]"There is nothing in the Constitution which prevents a policeman from addressing questions to anyone on the streets. Absent special circumstances, the person approached may not be detained or frisked, but may refuse to cooperate and go on his way. However, given the proper circumstances, such as those in this case, it seems to me the person may be briefly detained against his will while pertinent questions are directed to him. Of course, the person stopped is not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest, although it may alert the officer to the need for continued observation.

All of this is entirely my personal opinion based on what I have been reading...but I see no requirement in the T.C.A that tells me I am legally obligated to just answer whatever question law enforcement might want to ask me during a traffic stop, or a consensual contact on the street...

[Fallguy]

Beginning to wonder how much longer this thread needs to go on.....

I think even the LEOs have acknowledged in general there is no legal duty to answer questions like, "Where are you going?"; "Where are you coming from?" etc.. unless they directly apply to situation at hand. Even then you do not have to answer them if they may incriminate you.

The other side has acknowledged that LEOs can legally ask you such questions, in fact they can ask you ANY question about ANYTHING. But as said you do not have to answer.

Will some people refuse to answer even a very simple, basic questions if they feel it doesn't apply? YES

Will some answer any and all questions no matter how ridiculous or irrelevant? YES

Most will be in between.

So....what is the debate over anymore?

[Guest mn32768]

(Posted to wrong thread, deleted)

Edited April 16, 2009 by mn32768

[Guest LieutenantDan67]

So....what is the debate over anymore?

The debate should be over how the A-Team fired hundreds of rounds on that show and never actually shot anyone.

[Fallguy]

The debate should be over how the A-Team fired hundreds of rounds on that show and never actually shot anyone.

[strickj]

B.A. was shot once! Does that count?

[Guest db99wj]

B.A. was shot once! Does that count?

Man, he was dumb, you would think he would realize that each time they got a mission, they were going to tranquilize him so they could get him on the airplane!

[TN9mm]

The debate should be over how the A-Team fired hundreds of rounds on that show and never actually shot anyone.

Haah nice. Even back then as a kid I wondered why I liked those guys so much when they were such bad shots. At least MacGyver didn't bother to carry a gun cuz he would have always missed too. But man oh man duct tape and a swiss army knife.....

Edited April 16, 2009 by TN9mm
fix misspelling

[Guest 72ratcamaro]

Yeah, it does suck that i had to be cuffed, just the fact of the matter, but he did not look much older than me. Maybe he was new and that was why? If there would have been any attitude or hostility then i would of been upset, but like i said, everything was calm and casual. I've learned one thing about the system so far in life...it's not often you beat it. That is why i did not take further actions. Now if he had gave me about 3 citations after it all, that might of been a different story =)

Officers I know are just like most of us on here. Would you want to meet a stranger in what is usually a hostile situation who is carrying a weapon? I have found its far better to cooperate and make a friend then be hostile and make a bunch of enemies. ......Should have invited em shooting with us Izzy

[Guest justme]

The debate should be over how the A-Team fired hundreds of rounds on that show and never actually shot anyone.

I loved the A-Team when I was growing up...I thought that show was just so cool, but also noticed that automatic weapons would always be used and no one would ever get hurt...

but still I thought it was the best.

[Guest LieutenantDan67]

"I love it when my plan to derail this thread comes together."

[Guest Matchguy]

The debate should be over how the A-Team fired hundreds of rounds on that show and never actually shot anyone.

Do a little instructing sometime and you'll figure it out right away.

MG